Video: Should Division II Overhaul the Playoff System? - with Mike Racy

[KleShreen]

I am not against playoff reform, but I also think that there is a bit of an overreaction here and the last two seasons are being used to justify it. In 2021 no one was beating Ferris. We can all talk about how we can make the product look better, but there is no helping a team being that much better than everyone else. This past year, everyone thought that Mines was a Top 5 team. Honestly, they probably were. But they got waxed in the title game. This year, the two best teams were in the GLIAC. Some years, that wouldn't be the case. Was the GSC weak when Valdosta was hammered in 2021 or UNA was soundly beaten by NWMSU in 2016? Of course not.

Realistically, the D2 football landscape revolves around the MIAA, GLIAC and GSC. Then, there's a second tier of conferences that can possibly break through in any given year with the NSIC, LSC and RMAC. After that, there is everyone else. Realistically, do you see a champion coming out of any other conference outside of a lightning in a bottle scenario? Shoot, the same can almost be said of the RMAC and LSC as well.

So, what's the best solution? Do we take away regions? In a perfect world, we would. However, the NCAA is not going to add that extra travel expense. At best, what we can hope for is basing the brackets around geography based on the teams selected. And even then, it doesn't guarantee that you're going to have the best two teams meet in the title game. Shoot, even if they want to move the GLIAC back into SR1, I am okay with that. Just be aware that will likely mean current conference in SR1 will likely be shipped into a different region. And then, a conference from that region will likely move somewhere else. We all remember when SR2 had so few teams in it until the CIAA was moved back.

My point is that we can reform, but we also don't know what the landscape of D2 will look like in 5 or 10 years.

We're just asking for a format which allows for the two best teams in any given year to be able to face each other in the national championship, and the four best teams in any given year to be able to face each other in the semifinals. Whether all four of those teams are from the same conference, or one from each region. Either way.

[Ram Tough]

We're just asking for a format which allows for the two best teams in any given year to be able to face each other in the national championship, and the four best teams in any given year to be able to face each other in the semifinals. Whether all four of those teams are from the same conference, or one from each region. Either way.

We can wish and dream all we want. But we also have to deal with reality. And the reality is that the NCAA is not going to pay for travel for games all across the country. I'm not saying that it has to be strict regionalization, but some form of regionals based on geography is likely not ending any time soon. Also, how do we even know for sure who the best four teams are before the playoffs begin? Sure, you can likely pick out a favorite or two, but it can get cloudy after that.

And you do have to reward regular season performance on some level. If a team looks like the third best team but lost two games, should they be rewarded like the third best team? It's foolish to think that we can know for sure. I have never seen a season when I thought, "These are definitely the four best teams." Usually, there isn't a huge gap between teams 3-7 or so. You're never going to get it it perfect. But you can reform it to make it more feasible.

[Ram Tough]

I want to add one more thing. Part of the argument in the video is how the National Championship game played out. And that part of the argument is quite frankly ridiculous. In 2021, Ferris and Valdosta were considered the two best teams going into the title game. And this past year, not a soul thought that Mines was undeserving. Almost everyone felt like Ferris was a Top 2 team. I'm sure that FBS would've liked a better title game this past year as well.

[KleShreen]

We can wish and dream all we want. But we also have to deal with reality. And the reality is that the NCAA is not going to pay for travel for games all across the country. I'm not saying that it has to be strict regionalization, but some form of regionals based on geography is likely not ending any time soon. Also, how do we even know for sure who the best four teams are before the playoffs begin? Sure, you can likely pick out a favorite or two, but it can get cloudy after that.

And you do have to reward regular season performance on some level. If a team looks like the third best team but lost two games, should they be rewarded like the third best team? It's foolish to think that we can know for sure. I have never seen a season when I thought, "These are definitely the four best teams." Usually, there isn't a huge gap between teams 3-7 or so. You're never going to get it it perfect. But you can reform it to make it more feasible.

I guess I disagree with your statement on not being able to differentiate who the best teams are. I think, if you are a person who watches games from all around the country, it becomes fairly easy to see the tier levels that play out each season. The problem is that in D2, there's not many people doing that. You can probably count those people on two hands. Given the nature of D2 athletics, as you've mentioned, it's extremely regional and people tend to not pay attention outside of their own school, even less outside of their own conference, even less outside of their own region. By the time you jump through those barriers, you're left with a very small number of people. There's plenty of people who can do this in FBS, which is why we don't get undefeated Western Michigan in the 4-team playoff. Everyone with eyeballs and who has watched three high-level college football games knows they're not one of the four best teams. We don't have that luxury in D2.

Of course, this runs in to another issue, which is that even if D2 football were to get rid of the regionalization, the people in charge tend to not be qualified enough to accurately seed a playoff that would put teams in the best situation to end up with the best teams at the end. The people on the regional committees aren't watching anyone from outside their own region. Hell, they're probably not watching teams from outside their own conference. You'd be surprised how many coaches of colleges at all levels who wouldn't even be able to tell you who the top teams outside of their own conference and region are. A decade of interacting with coaches at multiple different schools, conferences, and regions, has given me that anecdotal information.

So where does that leave us with trying to solve this problem? I don't know. That's above my pay grade. I have some suggestions, but no silver bullets. I also think, and I'm sorry because this is going to specifically target your affiliation, that we have enough of a sample size where we can safely say that this is not a D2 problem. This is an SR1 problem. It's been 50 years of current SR1 schools never having won a national title, and a very limited amount of times actually getting to the national title game. Out of the current D2 schools who have won national titles, it is 15 from SR3, 7 from SR2 (counting Mississippi College), 3 from SR4, and 0 from SR1. Among title game appearances from current D2 schools, it is 21 for SR3, 16 for SR2 (counting Mississippi College), 8 from SR4, 6 from SR1, but only one of those from SR1 has been since the turn of the century. We've shared plenty of reasons for why this is. There's a pretty clear way to attempt to fix it, but nobody within the region seems to want to take that step, so we're here discussing the entire region's feasibility on a national level.

You are correct. This issue is never going to be fixed, because every other D2 sport is the same way. Last year in women's basketball, 3 of the top 6 teams in the final top 25 of the regular season were in one region. They had to go through each other just to advance to the elite eight, since basketball uses eight regions instead of four. In baseball, the south region usually has 10 teams in it that are better than virtually every other team in every other region, but only one of them can be in the final eight. It's how D2 wants to operate. So you are correct. This is never going to change. D2 as a whole is a participation ribbon level of college athletics for the most part. I'm just of the belief that in your most visible sport, in the most visible competitions, it makes D2 look bad for people who might only tune in to one or two D2 football games a year in the national championship or semifinal turn it on and see that there's frequently teams playing in those games who are nowhere close to being on the same level as the others. I know that you and some other SR1 people here have pointed out how it's "not fair" (or something to that effect) for the region to not be included as a competitor for the national title. But that argument can turn around and be made for the schools and student-athletes who have committed the resources to being competitive on a national level and are all cannibalizing each other each season. They're losing out on opportunities of success so schools who aren't making the same kind of commitment have a chance, instead.

[Ram Tough]

I guess I disagree with your statement on not being able to differentiate who the best teams are. I think, if you are a person who watches games from all around the country, it becomes fairly easy to see the tier levels that play out each season. The problem is that in D2, there's not many people doing that. You can probably count those people on two hands. Given the nature of D2 athletics, as you've mentioned, it's extremely regional and people tend to not pay attention outside of their own school, even less outside of their own conference, even less outside of their own region. By the time you jump through those barriers, you're left with a very small number of people. There's plenty of people who can do this in FBS, which is why we don't get undefeated Western Michigan in the 4-team playoff. Everyone with eyeballs and who has watched three high-level college football games knows they're not one of the four best teams. We don't have that luxury in D2.

Of course, this runs in to another issue, which is that even if D2 football were to get rid of the regionalization, the people in charge tend to not be qualified enough to accurately seed a playoff that would put teams in the best situation to end up with the best teams at the end. The people on the regional committees aren't watching anyone from outside their own region. Hell, they're probably not watching teams from outside their own conference. You'd be surprised how many coaches of colleges at all levels who wouldn't even be able to tell you who the top teams outside of their own conference and region are. A decade of interacting with coaches at multiple different schools, conferences, and regions, has given me that anecdotal information.

So where does that leave us with trying to solve this problem? I don't know. That's above my pay grade. I have some suggestions, but no silver bullets. I also think, and I'm sorry because this is going to specifically target your affiliation, that we have enough of a sample size where we can safely say that this is not a D2 problem. This is an SR1 problem. It's been 50 years of current SR1 schools never having won a national title, and a very limited amount of times actually getting to the national title game. Out of the current D2 schools who have won national titles, it is 15 from SR3, 7 from SR2 (counting Mississippi College), 3 from SR4, and 0 from SR1. Among title game appearances from current D2 schools, it is 21 for SR3, 16 for SR2 (counting Mississippi College), 8 from SR4, 6 from SR1, but only one of those from SR1 has been since the turn of the century. We've shared plenty of reasons for why this is. There's a pretty clear way to attempt to fix it, but nobody within the region seems to want to take that step, so we're here discussing the entire region's feasibility on a national level.

You are correct. This issue is never going to be fixed, because every other D2 sport is the same way. Last year in women's basketball, 3 of the top 6 teams in the final top 25 of the regular season were in one region. They had to go through each other just to advance to the elite eight, since basketball uses eight regions instead of four. In baseball, the south region usually has 10 teams in it that are better than virtually every other team in every other region, but only one of them can be in the final eight. It's how D2 wants to operate. So you are correct. This is never going to change. D2 as a whole is a participation ribbon level of college athletics for the most part. I'm just of the belief that in your most visible sport, in the most visible competitions, it makes D2 look bad for people who might only tune in to one or two D2 football games a year in the national championship or semifinal turn it on and see that there's frequently teams playing in those games who are nowhere close to being on the same level as the others. I know that you and some other SR1 people here have pointed out how it's "not fair" (or something to that effect) for the region to not be included as a competitor for the national title. But that argument can turn around and be made for the schools and student-athletes who have committed the resources to being competitive on a national level and are all cannibalizing each other each season. They're losing out on opportunities of success so schools who aren't making the same kind of commitment have a chance, instead.

You moved the goalposts here. You originally said that you wanted the top four teams to be able to face off in the semis. I was pointing out the fallacy of the idea that you can definitively know the top four teams heading into the playoffs. You usually know the top two or three. But things get murky after that. I didn't mention a thing about regions when it comes to this point. But here is where you ticked me off.

You then used that to act like SR1 fans are ignorant because we don't watch teams outside of our region. I can almost guarantee that I watch as many teams as I can who aren't behind a paywall. I used to watch teams in many conferences currently behind paywalls. Obviously, I am going to watch my alma mater first, like any other fan. However, unless my team is behind a paywall, I am not going to pay to watch any game on TV, just because the quality of play is better. But thanks for assuming we're all ignorant. Hell, I even said that I would be fine with the GLIAC coming back to SR1. You think that I don't know what that could mean? Get off your high horse.

This is exactly why I rarely talk about D2 on the National level on this board, because some of you all act like we're stupid because we don't follow one of the schools from one of the top conferences, and I already listed what those are. At no point did I ever say that something wasn't fair. I am just pointing out that all of these sweeping changes that some of you want will only happen in a utopia where travel and money isn't a concern. I'm saying that realistically, there's always going to be regionalization on some level, even if official regions cease to exist.

[KleShreen]

You moved the goalposts here. You originally said that you wanted the top four teams to be able to face off in the semis. I was pointing out the fallacy of the idea that you can definitively know the top four teams heading into the playoffs. You usually know the top two or three. But things get murky after that. I didn't mention a thing about regions when it comes to this point. But here is where you ticked me off.

You then used that to act like SR1 fans are ignorant because we don't watch teams outside of our region. I can almost guarantee that I watch as many teams as I can who aren't behind a paywall. I used to watch teams in many conferences currently behind paywalls. Obviously, I am going to watch my alma mater first, like any other fan. However, unless my team is behind a paywall, I am not going to pay to watch any game on TV, just because the quality of play is better. But thanks for assuming we're all ignorant. Hell, I even said that I would be fine with the GLIAC coming back to SR1. You think that I don't know what that could mean? Get off your high horse.

This is exactly why I rarely talk about D2 on the National level on this board, because some of you all act like we're stupid because we don't follow one of the schools from one of the top conferences, and I already listed what those are. At no point did I ever say that something wasn't fair. I am just pointing out that all of these sweeping changes that some of you want will only happen in a utopia where travel and money isn't a concern. I'm saying that realistically, there's always going to be regionalization on some level, even if official regions cease to exist.

Where did I single out SR1 fans not watching outside their region? I said virtually nobody does, so the possibility of having a nationalized bracket that is seeded reasonably is nearly impossible, because there's very few people who can do it. I'm not quite sure why you took that to mean specifically SR1 fans. One of the people who probably CAN do that is the biggest SR1 cheerleader in the country, Chuck Bitner, so. lol

Outside of that statement, of course nobody actually knows who the top 4 teams are upon entering the playoffs. Even with the best playoff setup, it's possible, and likely, that the top 4 teams still don't end up in the semifinals. That's the nature of football. I'm just saying that the D2 football playoff should allow for the best teams to rise to the top, regardless of where they're physically located, and they should have the ability to make it to at least the semifinals, for the sake of D2 having a competitive national product.

[Ram Tough]

Where did I single out SR1 fans not watching outside their region? I said virtually nobody does, so the possibility of having a nationalized bracket that is seeded reasonably is nearly impossible, because there's very few people who can do it. I'm not quite sure why you took that to mean specifically SR1 fans. One of the people who probably CAN do that is the biggest SR1 cheerleader in the country, Chuck Bitner, so. lol

Outside of that statement, of course nobody actually knows who the top 4 teams are upon entering the playoffs. Even with the best playoff setup, it's possible, and likely, that the top 4 teams still don't end up in the semifinals. That's the nature of football. I'm just saying it should be possible that if it is clear the best 4 teams all come from the same region or conference, they should have the ability to make it to at least the semifinals, for the sake of D2 having a competitive national product.

What competitive National product? You could completely exclude SR1, and you are going to have 5-8 teams at most who could win a title. And many years it would be more like 1-3. That is reality.

[KleShreen]

What competitive National product? You could completely exclude SR1, and you are going to have 5-8 teams at most who could win a title. And many years it would be more like 1-3. That is reality.

The "competitive national product" that is D2's nationally televised games in the semifinals and finals. I want a good representation of Division II athletics during our division's biggest events. And those three games are D2's three biggest events of the year, with all due respect to every other sport. I think when casual fans who don't watch/watch very little D2 football during the year tune in to these national events, they expect and assume that the teams left are the best remaining teams, because they likely have no knowledge of anything about the season up to that point. When we end up with 30+-point blowouts regularly during those three events, I think it makes all of D2 look poor.

[IUPNation]

We're just asking for a format which allows for the two best teams in any given year to be able to face each other in the national championship, and the four best teams in any given year to be able to face each other in the semifinals. Whether all four of those teams are from the same conference, or one from each region. Either way.

Then only have a four team playoff picked by Midwestern foosball fans. Problem solved.

[IUPNation]

What competitive National product? You could completely exclude SR1, and you are going to have 5-8 teams at most who could win a title. And many years it would be more like 1-3. That is reality.

We have a Bingo!

[IUPNation]

I guess I disagree with your statement on not being able to differentiate who the best teams are. I think, if you are a person who watches games from all around the country, it becomes fairly easy to see the tier levels that play out each season. The problem is that in D2, there's not many people doing that. You can probably count those people on two hands. Given the nature of D2 athletics, as you've mentioned, it's extremely regional and people tend to not pay attention outside of their own school, even less outside of their own conference, even less outside of their own region. By the time you jump through those barriers, you're left with a very small number of people. There's plenty of people who can do this in FBS, which is why we don't get undefeated Western Michigan in the 4-team playoff. Everyone with eyeballs and who has watched three high-level college football games knows they're not one of the four best teams. We don't have that luxury in D2.

Of course, this runs in to another issue, which is that even if D2 football were to get rid of the regionalization, the people in charge tend to not be qualified enough to accurately seed a playoff that would put teams in the best situation to end up with the best teams at the end. The people on the regional committees aren't watching anyone from outside their own region. Hell, they're probably not watching teams from outside their own conference. You'd be surprised how many coaches of colleges at all levels who wouldn't even be able to tell you who the top teams outside of their own conference and region are. A decade of interacting with coaches at multiple different schools, conferences, and regions, has given me that anecdotal information.

So where does that leave us with trying to solve this problem? I don't know. That's above my pay grade. I have some suggestions, but no silver bullets. I also think, and I'm sorry because this is going to specifically target your affiliation, that we have enough of a sample size where we can safely say that this is not a D2 problem. This is an SR1 problem. It's been 50 years of current SR1 schools never having won a national title, and a very limited amount of times actually getting to the national title game. Out of the current D2 schools who have won national titles, it is 15 from SR3, 7 from SR2 (counting Mississippi College), 3 from SR4, and 0 from SR1. Among title game appearances from current D2 schools, it is 21 for SR3, 16 for SR2 (counting Mississippi College), 8 from SR4, 6 from SR1, but only one of those from SR1 has been since the turn of the century. We've shared plenty of reasons for why this is. There's a pretty clear way to attempt to fix it, but nobody within the region seems to want to take that step, so we're here discussing the entire region's feasibility on a national level.

You are correct. This issue is never going to be fixed, because every other D2 sport is the same way. Last year in women's basketball, 3 of the top 6 teams in the final top 25 of the regular season were in one region. They had to go through each other just to advance to the elite eight, since basketball uses eight regions instead of four. In baseball, the south region usually has 10 teams in it that are better than virtually every other team in every other region, but only one of them can be in the final eight. It's how D2 wants to operate. So you are correct. This is never going to change. D2 as a whole is a participation ribbon level of college athletics for the most part. I'm just of the belief that in your most visible sport, in the most visible competitions, it makes D2 look bad for people who might only tune in to one or two D2 football games a year in the national championship or semifinal turn it on and see that there's frequently teams playing in those games who are nowhere close to being on the same level as the others. I know that you and some other SR1 people here have pointed out how it's "not fair" (or something to that effect) for the region to not be included as a competitor for the national title. But that argument can turn around and be made for the schools and student-athletes who have committed the resources to being competitive on a national level and are all cannibalizing each other each season. They're losing out on opportunities of success so schools who aren't making the same kind of commitment have a chance, instead.

There are only 10 current schools in D2 that have won the title. Stop it with the regions. There are over 160 schools playing foosball and only about 5% of those schools have a real shot every year.

One of those 10 currents is Northern Meatchicken who won it way back in 1975. They are no threat to win a National Title anytime soon. So toss them out.

That leaves 2 MIAA teams, 2 GLIAC (although is now 17 years since GV has won anything), 3 GSC (and West Florida will move up as soon as they stop playing in a baseball stadium), 1 NSIC and 1 RMAC team that have won a title..

RamTough had is correct. There are three conferences with a few top teams who dominate. A few second tier that goes on a run and then there is everyone else.

That is the reality.

The fix for now is to put all three top conferences in their own region. The whining is because the two headed monster of the GLIAC is stuck in a region with the two headed monster of the MIAA.

You only hate on Region 1 because the GLIAC got moved and you hold a silly grudge. The reality is the Northeast 10 didn't participate in the playoffs prior to 2003. The first year they did the NCAA gave Bentley the higher seed in the Region ahead of GV who was in the middle of their dominating run. Do you even remember that..how GV had to travel to Bentley? They then redid the regions the following year when the playoff field got expanded and you got moved along with other conferences that got moved. It wasn't the Pee Sack demanding it to be removed. GV then won it's semi-final game over Kingsville by 28. So blowouts in Semi Finals have happened very often. So get over it.

The even bigger problem is how the teams are calculated each year. IUP has been ****ed over several times based on the spread sheet numbers.

2003 - IUP belonged in over Bentley. But Saggy and GV took two spots and Edinboro took another as they were the only team to beat IUP...and that left the NCAA giving a spot to the NE 10 when they had no history.

2006 - The Northeast 10 once again benefitted by the spread sheets as it got THREE teams in the playoffs. Two of them were 7-3 teams in Merrimack and Southern Connecticut who had taken huge beatings in their losses and they got in over 8-2 IUP and Mon Valley U (California). IUP lost both games by less than 10 points total. Merrimack was the 3 seed, and the other two got the 4/5 seed and they faced off. West Chester...the 6th seed took out 3 seed Bryant and then Merrimack who won the first round over So. Conn got demolished by top seed Shepherd. But the spread sheets said the NE10 teams had a harder scheduled (by playing a NE 10 schedule and the Pee Sack teams got screwed over by the unbalanced Pee Sack cross over mandates)

2015 - IUP should have been the 4 seed over Charleston. IUP went down there and ran them off their field. Then the next week only lost by 4 to eventual National runner up Shepherd. But the spread sheets said Charleston was better!

2016 - Same thing happened again. IUP should have been the four seed over Fairmont. IUP rolled them even worse on their field. But the spread sheets said Fairmont was better!

So...you think only the top teams gets screwed over by this setup when they have never been fair or tell the whole story.

Again, the temporary fix is to divorce the GLIAC and MIAA from the same region.

I do like they reseed the final four teams now. I never liked how they predetermined what regions would face each other long before the brackets were filled out.

Nobody is ever going to be happy.

[IUPNation]

The "competitive national product" that is D2's nationally televised games in the semifinals and finals. I want a good representation of Division II athletics during our division's biggest events. And those three games are D2's three biggest events of the year, with all due respect to every other sport. I think when casual fans who don't watch/watch very little D2 football during the year tune in to these national events, they expect and assume that the teams left are the best remaining teams, because they likely have no knowledge of anything about the season up to that point. When we end up with 30+-point blowouts regularly during those three events, I think it makes all of D2 look poor.

The semi finals are on channels most people don't have on their services. I couldn't watch it and I have Xfininty's X1 service that is costly and the games were not on any of the multiple ESPN channels that come with the service. Nobody is really watching Semi Final games and the D2 final game was more competitive than the FBS game.

[Predatory Primates]

I agree with kle that the barrier to getting the best teams in is the fact that there are almost no d2 experts. With the death of localized media, that problem is getting worse each year.

That is the problem that needs to be addressed by the powers that be before we can even talk about tweaking things to get a truly competitive setup.

[Predatory Primates]

The semi finals are on channels most people don't have on their services. I couldn't watch it and I have Xfininty's X1 service that is costly and the games were not on any of the multiple ESPN channels that come with the service. Nobody is really watching Semi Final games and the D2 final game was more competitive than the FBS game.

I think the poor quality of the product has helped lead to that level of 0 Fs given by national media.

[Predatory Primates]

I am not against playoff reform, but I also think that there is a bit of an overreaction here and the last two seasons are being used to justify it. In 2021 no one was beating Ferris. We can all talk about how we can make the product look better, but there is no helping a team being that much better than everyone else. This past year, everyone thought that Mines was a Top 5 team. Honestly, they probably were. But they got waxed in the title game. This year, the two best teams were in the GLIAC. Some years, that wouldn't be the case. Was the GSC weak when Valdosta was hammered in 2021 or UNA was soundly beaten by NWMSU in 2016? Of course not.

Realistically, the D2 football landscape revolves around the MIAA, GLIAC and GSC. Then, there's a second tier of conferences that can possibly break through in any given year with the NSIC, LSC and RMAC. After that, there is everyone else. Realistically, do you see a champion coming out of any other conference outside of a lightning in a bottle scenario? Shoot, the same can almost be said of the RMAC and LSC as well.

So, what's the best solution? Do we take away regions? In a perfect world, we would. However, the NCAA is not going to add that extra travel expense. At best, what we can hope for is basing the brackets around geography based on the teams selected. And even then, it doesn't guarantee that you're going to have the best two teams meet in the title game. Shoot, even if they want to move the GLIAC back into SR1, I am okay with that. Just be aware that will likely mean current conference in SR1 will likely be shipped into a different region. And then, a conference from that region will likely move somewhere else. We all remember when SR2 had so few teams in it until the CIAA was moved back.

My point is that we can reform, but we also don't know what the landscape of D2 will look like in 5 or 10 years.

That's a good point. Conferences are always in a state of flux.

Like I said earlier. SR1 would get much more competitive internally if just one school would get to the financial level of commitment, get truly competitive, and stay there for a while. Their biggest burden right now is the Peter Principle. Teams up there only have to be X good in order to make the semifinals. There is no real motivation to get from x to X+Y+Z, where they would need to be to win a NC. I think SR4, in it's current state, could head down that same rabbit hole.