Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Automatic bids coming to D2 football in 2025, replacing Earned Access

Collapse

Support The Site!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Automatic bids coming to D2 football in 2025, replacing Earned Access

    D2 football schools just passed Proposal No. 2025-8 at the NCAA convention, guaranteeing each conference an automatic bid to the playoffs (starting this fall) and removing the Earned Access provision. Details, including a FAQ section, can be found here.

    Key ramifications:

    * There is, of course, no longer a chance of a conference being left out entirely. This hadn't happened since 2019 (NE10), but there have been several times since then where it seemed close to happening.

    * It's the conference champion that's guaranteed, as opposed to the highest-ranked team. Twice in the past few years a champion was left out when someone else from their conference made it (2021 Midwestern State, 2022 Newberry).

    * Most likely the Gulf South, with 4 football members, will not be eligible for an auto bid (as if they needed one), but the other 15 conferences should qualify (including Conference Carolinas). But the language in the official notice linked above mentions 16 conferences, so maybe the GSC will have some sort of waiver.

    * Legislation passed last year dictates that if more than 50% of a sport's bracket is auto bids, it triggers a review of potential bracket expansion. Even if the GSC doesn't qualify, that applies here with 15/28 (53.6%). To my knowledge, the earliest expansion could happen (due to the three-year D2 budget cycle) would be 2027, and it seems likely that we'll see a 32-team bracket beginning then.

  • #2
    Sounds good 👍

    Comment


    • #3
      That would eliminate the 4 first round byes

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by 4nick8 View Post
        That would eliminate the 4 first round byes
        And this is going to give the NCAA more money with those 4 extra games. When dealing with the NCAA, ALWAYS follow the money. And the NCAA will find some closer matchups also to be sure they send as little as possible on travel is my bet.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by champgymusa View Post

          And this is going to give the NCAA more money with those 4 extra games. When dealing with the NCAA, ALWAYS follow the money. And the NCAA will find some closer matchups also to be sure they send as little as possible on travel is my bet.
          Are they really making that much on D2 playoff games? Sounds like more games = more lost money to me.

          Comment


          • #6
            https://footballscoop.com/news/ncaa-...ection-process

            Comment


            • #7
              I’m curious what the votes looked like. There are four obvious “yes” votes from the sponsor/co-sponsors. It wouldn’t surprise me if the GMAC was also a yes given the SR realignment and perhaps the SAC to avoid another 2022 Newberry scenario but I don’t know enough about the other leagues to guess how they’d vote.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TheBigCat2192 View Post

                I’m curious what the votes looked like. There are four obvious “yes” votes from the sponsor/co-sponsors. It wouldn’t surprise me if the GMAC was also a yes given the SR realignment and perhaps the SAC to avoid another 2022 Newberry scenario but I don’t know enough about the other leagues to guess how they’d vote.
                I'm a bit confused by this reporting, as I was under the impression that the voting was done by schools, not conferences...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Inkblot View Post

                  I'm a bit confused by this reporting, as I was under the impression that the voting was done by schools, not conferences...
                  I don’t know enough about the process to say. Perhaps the FootballScoop guy got it wrong.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Maybe I missed something. The way I understand it is that the bracket would not change and there still would be 28 teams for now, but they need to explore expanding the bracket.because of how many automatic qualifiers there are. Which I'm sure will happen. But I could be wrong.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Woodbury View Post
                      Maybe I missed something. The way I understand it is that the bracket would not change and there still would be 28 teams for now, but they need to explore expanding the bracket.because of how many automatic qualifiers there are. Which I'm sure will happen. But I could be wrong.
                      You didn't miss something; just to re-word everything. The review is triggered because more than 50% of the bracket is AQ. It's not going to happen any time soon, or ever, but if a 17th conference begins sponsoring football the AQ would exceed 60% of the 28-team bracket. Expanding the bracket is a move the prevent exceeding the 60% AQ limit and as Inkblot noted will most likely happen for the 2027 season. We should be done with football bracket expansion after this as it would take 20 football-sponsoring conferences to exceed 60% AQ of a 32-team bracket and I can't imagine there is anyone who thinks that would happen.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Inkblot View Post

                        I'm a bit confused by this reporting, as I was under the impression that the voting was done by schools, not conferences...
                        According to the story published by the NCAA, the proposal was passed by a vote of the conferences. It passed with a 60% majority. The conferences that sponsored/co-sponsored did not vote.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Good. Conference Champions should be rewarded.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by SW_Mustang View Post

                            Are they really making that much on D2 playoff games? Sounds like more games = more lost money to me.
                            Ding, ding, ding!

                            +1

                            Or any other way you have of saying a post is exactly right With very occasional exceptions, DII athletics is a money loser.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by boatcapt View Post
                              With very occasional exceptions, DII athletics is a money loser.
                              Not as bad as DIII athletics.

                              Comment

                              Ad3

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X