Announcement

**D2football Fanl** · 11-04-2021, 05:26 AM

SIAC
Kentucky State: Never made it (eligible since 1973)
Clark Atlanta: Never made it (eligible since 1980)
Savannah State: Never made it (eligible from 1981 through 2000 or so)
Lane: Never made it (eligible since 1993)
Benedict: Never made it (eligible since 2002)
Central State: 1986 (not eligible between 1986 and 2008)
Morehouse: 2010
Albany State: 2011
Fort Valley State: 2012
Tuskegee: 2016
Miles: 2019

Savannah State made the playoffs in 1992, they lost to Jacksonville State in the first round.

**BulldogLB** · 11-04-2021, 06:20 AM

Hard to believe teams like WT and Pitt State haven't been to the playoffs since 2013-2014.

**Brandon** · 11-04-2021, 11:55 AM

Great research IB.

**laker** · 11-04-2021, 12:01 PM

Very interesting post! We were just talking about the NSIC board. I like to see new teams make the playoffs- if you can post about which teams make it for the first time this year it would be great.

**Argonut** · 11-04-2021, 12:14 PM

The fact that 103 schools out of 167 teams have made the playoffs is a great testament to the inclusionary nature of the D2 playoff system, which I would argue is the best in college football in terms of inclusion, competitiveness and drama.

**Tech Boys** · 11-04-2021, 12:20 PM

Shouldn't Arkansas-Monticello read "(eligible since 1995)"? That was when they, Southern Arkansas, and Arkansas Tech joined the Gulf South.

**Inkblot** · 11-04-2021, 12:45 PM

**Inkblot** · 11-04-2021, 12:46 PM

Originally posted by Tech Boys View Post

Shouldn't Arkansas-Monticello read "(eligible since 1995)"? That was when they, Southern Arkansas, and Arkansas Tech joined the Gulf South.

Corrected it to 1997, the year they completed their provisional period.

**d2-football-fan** · 11-04-2021, 03:30 PM

Originally posted by Argonut View Post

The fact that 103 schools out of 167 teams have made the playoffs is a great testament to the inclusionary nature of the D2 playoff system, which I would argue is the best in college football in terms of inclusion, competitiveness and drama.

There are two aspects of "competitiveness".

The first - the ability to make the playoffs. Yes, as you state, a lot of teams can, and have, made the playoffs over the years. And this has been aided in recent years by expansions of the number of teams who qualify each year.

The second - which is a truer measure of "competitive" is that there are only a handful of teams which are truly capable of winning the championship, and they tend to be the "blue-bloods" of division 2. And frankly, this plays into spreading playoff spots among regions to spread the love, rather than letting the best 28 teams in the playoffs. There are lots of years that there are "better" teams in better conferences that don't make the playoffs, and would be harder outs in the playoffs, but don't make it because of the competitiveness of their conference or super region. They don't get a chance because a less competitive team (or number of teams) make it because of their geography.

I'm not making a gripe about the system or anything else. But, I think it's commonly understood that good teams get left out, bad teams get in, and only a few teams really stand a shot at winning the championship.

Lastly, because of the relatively low value of winning a D2 championship (at the institutional level - it's hard to leverage into something meaningful), the teams that have "never made it" aren't very inclined to make the changes to turn their program around. So it takes an aligning of the stars for a team that has never made or, or not made it in decades, to have a breakthrough season. These are the underdogs that build excitement in their individual season of glory, but they rarely make deep runs in the postseason nor lead to program turnarounds that last.

I think that was a long-winded way of saying, there is a difference between qualifying for the playoffs versus actually being competitive for championships.

**Runnin' Cat** · 11-04-2021, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by d2-football-fan View Post

There are two aspects of "competitiveness".

The first - the ability to make the playoffs. Yes, as you state, a lot of teams can, and have, made the playoffs over the years. And this has been aided in recent years by expansions of the number of teams who qualify each year.

The second - which is a truer measure of "competitive" is that there are only a handful of teams which are truly capable of winning the championship, and they tend to be the "blue-bloods" of division 2. And frankly, this plays into spreading playoff spots among regions to spread the love, rather than letting the best 28 teams in the playoffs. There are lots of years that there are "better" teams in better conferences that don't make the playoffs, and would be harder outs in the playoffs, but don't make it because of the competitiveness of their conference or super region. They don't get a chance because a less competitive team (or number of teams) make it because of their geography.

I'm not making a gripe about the system or anything else. But, I think it's commonly understood that good teams get left out, bad teams get in, and only a few teams really stand a shot at winning the championship.

Lastly, because of the relatively low value of winning a D2 championship (at the institutional level - it's hard to leverage into something meaningful), the teams that have "never made it" aren't very inclined to make the changes to turn their program around. So it takes an aligning of the stars for a team that has never made or, or not made it in decades, to have a breakthrough season. These are the underdogs that build excitement in their individual season of glory, but they rarely make deep runs in the postseason nor lead to program turnarounds that last.

I think that was a long-winded way of saying, there is a difference between qualifying for the playoffs versus actually being competitive for championships.

How is that different than any other NCAA tournament?

**laker** · 11-04-2021, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by Argonut View Post

The fact that 103 schools out of 167 teams have made the playoffs is a great testament to the inclusionary nature of the D2 playoff system, which I would argue is the best in college football in terms of inclusion, competitiveness and drama.

Spot one. A much superior system to the FBS P5 Invitational. You can't win if you don't get to play.

**Tech Boys** · 11-04-2021, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by d2-football-fan View Post

There are two aspects of "competitiveness".

The first - the ability to make the playoffs. Yes, as you state, a lot of teams can, and have, made the playoffs over the years. And this has been aided in recent years by expansions of the number of teams who qualify each year.

The second - which is a truer measure of "competitive" is that there are only a handful of teams which are truly capable of winning the championship, and they tend to be the "blue-bloods" of division 2. And frankly, this plays into spreading playoff spots among regions to spread the love, rather than letting the best 28 teams in the playoffs. There are lots of years that there are "better" teams in better conferences that don't make the playoffs, and would be harder outs in the playoffs, but don't make it because of the competitiveness of their conference or super region. They don't get a chance because a less competitive team (or number of teams) make it because of their geography.

I'm not making a gripe about the system or anything else. But, I think it's commonly understood that good teams get left out, bad teams get in, and only a few teams really stand a shot at winning the championship.

Lastly, because of the relatively low value of winning a D2 championship (at the institutional level - it's hard to leverage into something meaningful), the teams that have "never made it" aren't very inclined to make the changes to turn their program around. So it takes an aligning of the stars for a team that has never made or, or not made it in decades, to have a breakthrough season. These are the underdogs that build excitement in their individual season of glory, but they rarely make deep runs in the postseason nor lead to program turnarounds that last.

I think that was a long-winded way of saying, there is a difference between qualifying for the playoffs versus actually being competitive for championships.

I'll challenge this statement. Arkansas Tech got a billboard with a picture of our men's golf team holding their trophies and the words "2021 National Champions" across the top. "ATU Men's Golf" is on one side and a school logo on the other side. That billboard is about 80 miles from campus in Little Rock. This was done by the institution in celebration and to promote the school. We have placed a high value on winning championships. Every year, the previous school year's champions are brought onto the field and introduced at halftime of a football game with the team's accomplishments announced.

**libertybearcat** · 11-04-2021, 05:17 PM

Originally posted by d2-football-fan View Post

There are two aspects of "competitiveness".

The first - the ability to make the playoffs. Yes, as you state, a lot of teams can, and have, made the playoffs over the years. And this has been aided in recent years by expansions of the number of teams who qualify each year.

The second - which is a truer measure of "competitive" is that there are only a handful of teams which are truly capable of winning the championship, and they tend to be the "blue-bloods" of division 2. And frankly, this plays into spreading playoff spots among regions to spread the love, rather than letting the best 28 teams in the playoffs. There are lots of years that there are "better" teams in better conferences that don't make the playoffs, and would be harder outs in the playoffs, but don't make it because of the competitiveness of their conference or super region. They don't get a chance because a less competitive team (or number of teams) make it because of their geography.

I'm not making a gripe about the system or anything else. But, I think it's commonly understood that good teams get left out, bad teams get in, and only a few teams really stand a shot at winning the championship.

Lastly, because of the relatively low value of winning a D2 championship (at the institutional level - it's hard to leverage into something meaningful), the teams that have "never made it" aren't very inclined to make the changes to turn their program around. So it takes an aligning of the stars for a team that has never made or, or not made it in decades, to have a breakthrough season. These are the underdogs that build excitement in their individual season of glory, but they rarely make deep runs in the postseason nor lead to program turnarounds that last.

I think that was a long-winded way of saying, there is a difference between qualifying for the playoffs versus actually being competitive for championships.

Northwest has been able to parlay their NC's into an enormous amount of fundraising for the institution...levels we couldn't have sniffed before 1998.

Our last initiative was told by "consultants" you can only raise about $5M...we went over $55M, including an Indoor Facility and a new Agriculture Learning Center at the University farm...no way we could have done that before 1998. IIRC the previous initiative was a little less than $40M that began in 2001 and included a renovation to our football stadium...

I can assure you that has a tremendous impact on us at an institutional level...not to mention our enrollment is considerably higher than it was pre-1998.

**laker** · 11-04-2021, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by libertybearcat View Post

Northwest has been able to parlay their NC's into an enormous amount of fundraising for the institution...levels we couldn't have sniffed before 1998.

Our last initiative was told by "consultants" you can only raise about $5M...we went over $55M, including an Indoor Facility and a new Agriculture Learning Center at the University farm...no way we could have done that before 1998. IIRC the previous initiative was a little less than $40M that began in 2001 and included a renovation to our football stadium...

I can assure you that has a tremendous impact on us at an institutional level...not to mention our enrollment is considerably higher than it was pre-1998.

I remember watching MSU-Mankato play Northwest in the early 90s. I think Mel's first year was winless- look how he turned it around. Now they are nationally known and not just in football. I'd say athletic success is very important regardless of level. The amount of donations at Mankato has skyrocketed. The amount of donations to St Cloud- besides maybe for men's hockey- had dwindled along with student numbers. Beautiful stadium- no football team.

Announcement

Playoff droughts

Support The Site!

Playoff droughts

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Ad3