Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Football schedule vote

Collapse

Support The Site!

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

  • Brandon
    replied
    Just horrible.

    Leave a comment:


  • northwest missouri state
    replied
    Originally posted by Brandon View Post

    Yes, but you like 1970's traditions and silver pants.
    https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.town...16a2.image.jpg
    https://arkansasrazorbacks.com/wp-co...combo-site.jpg
    https://ssl.c.photoshelter.com/img-g...n-ksuneb02.jpg

    idr the '70s tradition you speak of but no doubt all those unis above look fab w/ just one think in common. quite the coinkidink.

    Leave a comment:


  • northwest missouri state
    replied
    Originally posted by GrifFan View Post

    As I understand what Looney is proposing, this would somewhat be addressed by a flex game in week 11, when you'd pair the teams from each division that hadn't played each other. If you have two teams that go undefeated, you'd have a clear picture. If the best team in a division has a loss or two, it gets murkier, but that's true in the silo schedule too.
    semi/somewhat but not really. there would be years it works out (probably more often than not) & others where it wouldn't.

    & murkier again based on personal pov if you have a problem w/ co-champs. i do not. i like h2h in order to settle seeding but this yr for ex i don't view our game w/ cm as being weightier than our game w/ nk or their game w/ nk. they beat them we didn't. but we played the same league sched & can reasonably conclude we did as well as they did & vv & no one else did as well. so it's a fair outcome to send a trophy to both maryville & wburg. when that occurs w/ the proposed plan itt it creates a cluster that leaves you w/ no clear cut champ or clear cut cochamps.

    maybe lw needs to get in over us one of these years. it'd serve us right for taking such a stance in regards to silo.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brandon
    replied
    Originally posted by northwest missouri state View Post
    now if you don't think the cc is that important then maybe it's not as big a deal. i happen to think it's really important....more important than the nc frankly. winning the latter is extremely rare, our recent run not w/ standing whereas a cc is more consistently attainable for all schools involved & involves beating our rivals.

    so it just depends on pov.
    Yes, but you like 1970's traditions and silver pants.

    Leave a comment:


  • GrifFan
    replied
    Originally posted by northwest missouri state View Post
    it is just a matter of what you value. as awful as silo is i prefer it to competing for a league title against a school(s) we'd necessarily not play while competing for said title.

    we might think let's say that ps was better than es in 2013. i just think for them not to ever have the chance to play outside of possibly the po's if both make it is asinine when awarding a conf title they are both competing in part against each other for

    at least in div 1a there are ccg's where there is a logical path to a reasonable outcome for such scenarios. that wouldn't work here w/ scheduling for the po's obv.

    now if you don't think the cc is that important then maybe it's not as big a deal. i happen to think it's really important....more important than the nc frankly. winning the latter is extremely rare, our recent run not w/ standing whereas a cc is more consistently attainable for all schools involved & involves beating our rivals.

    so it just depends on pov.
    As I understand what Looney is proposing, this would somewhat be addressed by a flex game in week 11, when you'd pair the teams from each division that hadn't played each other. If you have two teams that go undefeated, you'd have a clear picture. If the best team in a division has a loss or two, it gets murkier, but that's true in the silo schedule too.

    Leave a comment:


  • northwest missouri state
    replied
    it is just a matter of what you value. as awful as silo is i prefer it to competing for a league title against a school(s) we'd necessarily not play while competing for said title.

    we might think let's say that ps was better than es in 2013. i just think for them not to ever have the chance to play outside of possibly the po's if both make it is asinine when awarding a conf title they are both competing in part against each other for

    at least in div 1a there are ccg's where there is a logical path to a reasonable outcome for such scenarios. that wouldn't work here w/ scheduling for the po's obv.

    now if you don't think the cc is that important then maybe it's not as big a deal. i happen to think it's really important....more important than the nc frankly. winning the latter is extremely rare, our recent run not w/ standing whereas a cc is more consistently attainable for all schools involved & involves beating our rivals.

    so it just depends on pov.

    Leave a comment:


  • Taxman
    replied
    Originally posted by northwest missouri state View Post

    not playing everyone isn't the solution it'll only muddy the waters depending on the yr w/ respect to the league title & devalue it.
    we need natural attrition to occur & when it does we don't add schools & then sched non con games. the damage is done as far as adding all these schools, it is what it is.
    once that attrition occurs add a non con or 2. hopefully 2 but 1 is better than none.
    I'm actually beginning to soften my stance on the needing to play all conference teams for a true champion bit but the randomness of who you end up with on the conference schedule coupled with adding noncon games results in a lot of variance outside of a program's control. This may not be worth it for the sake of "fun".

    Leave a comment:


  • Taxman
    replied
    Originally posted by Hornetfan View Post

    I am 100% behind this. Personally I think ten team leagues are the best way to go for scheduling, travel, building rivalries, etc. But unfortunately all of the movement in collegiate athletics causes a lot of administrators, mostly on the conference level, to like the relative stability of larger conferences. Think about the Lone Star and Great Northwest conferences. Both of them have dropped down at one point to where they had to come up with all sorts of strange ways to fill out their schedules - playing home and home in the same season, playing conference crossovers at the end of the year, etc.
    If I could be ruler of all D2 I would realign all football playing conferences to include ten teams and cap all conferences not involving football at 12. Of course that would probably mean the end of either the RMAC or the GNAC because of the lack of schools in the west.
    100% behind this. And remove strict regionalization while we're at it. Imagine the number of out of conference games created if you cap every football conference at 10 football playing schools.

    Leave a comment:


  • Taxman
    replied
    Originally posted by Brandon View Post

    Because they use some horrible criteria invented because of the scheduling practices of the GAC and MIAA.

    GVSU had three losses but would most likely be behind Wayne State because of the h-2-h loss.
    Lindenwood had two losses (I personally think an FCS loss should count against a team).

    The thing to remember is that the more non-conferences games played the bigger the margins become IF the MIAA and GLIAC are truly better than the GAC and GLVC. If they aren't, fine, stay in the current scheduling model but quit bragging about being the SEC of D2.
    The SEC of D2 deal died, or should have died, a long time ago. It's still a better overall conference than the GAC and GLVC. The GLVC can't even be a debate. It's full of MIAA rejects.

    Leave a comment:


  • Taxman
    replied
    Originally posted by GrifFan View Post

    UNK has done a great job. Maybe the process wouldn't have taken five years if they'd had a chance to play some non-cons. Or maybe you're right and that would be counterproductive. I'd rather each program make that decision for themselves.

    Yes, the silo schedule is great for distinguishing between two MIAA teams (although your hypothetical can happen in a silo schedule too--who gets seeded higher between a 9-2 Northwest team and an 8-3 Emporia team that beat them head to head?). But how do we compare a 10-1 MIAA team vs. a 10-1 (or 9-2 or 11-0) GAC team?
    Easy. Choose the MIAA team. :)

    Leave a comment:


  • Taxman
    replied
    It's not the committee's job to dissuade scheduling.

    Leave a comment:


  • Taxman
    replied
    Originally posted by Hornetfan View Post

    Doesn't that reinforce the argument that GVSU should have been in in front of Lindenwood? I don't think you can argue that either of them should have been in over the five teams with one or fewer losses so it comes down to GVSU, Lindenwood and Indy for the final two spots. As a conference the GLIAC had a better non-conference record, and if I figured it correctly went 5-2 inhead to head matchups with the GLVC. So if playing non-conference is an important data point why did Lindenwood make the playoffs and Grand Valley didn't?
    A little louder for those in the back.

    Leave a comment:


  • Brandon
    replied
    Criteria needs to more heavily weigh SOS. That would not have prevented an 8-2 Lindenwood over a 9-2 Northwest last year, but it would help to get scheduling back to where it should be and eventually benefit the right teams.

    Leave a comment:


  • Taxman
    replied
    Originally posted by Hornetfan View Post
    Ask Grand Valley about Looney's line of if you play non-conference games and win them you will will be in. There is a lot more to it than that.

    Lakers went 3-0 in non-conference, Lindenwood went 1-2 in non-conference (1-3 if you count the FCS game) and both were 8-3 overall - although LWU was 8-2 in D2 games.

    The Lions won their league and with this particular committee it seems like that had more relevance than the non-conference record. GVSU played Edinboro (3-8), Delta State (6-4) and William Jewell (1-10) while LWU played Midwestern State (5-6), Davenport (5-5), and Saginaw Valley (5-5). IF you look at the comparative scores, they both beat SVSU by a touchdown, GVSU thumped WJC by 53 while LWU won by 10, and the Lakers beat Davenport while Lindenwood lost to them.

    Who you play is important as well. Edinboro, Delta, Midwestern and Saginaw have all been good in the last three years so they were probably assuming they would get a SOS bump when playing them that didn't really happen this year. I've said it before but most coaches and ADs like to be in control of the situation. They have some control over their SOS with the silo schedule.
    Yeah, Looney helped support the exact opposite of what he wants to occur. He should have never mentioned Lindenwood. That citation blows up in his face. Rumor was that Lindenwood was going to get in over NW should they have ended up with the same record. You serious, Clark? Not a soul outside of the regional selection committee thought Lindenwood was better, or even more deserving, than NW. NW went on to more than prove this with the absolute curb stomping they gave to the Lions. The committee needs to reevaluate their process going forward if that was indeed the case.

    Leave a comment:


  • northwest missouri state
    replied
    none of the excuses hold water unless you need to pretend they do

    Leave a comment:

Ad3

Collapse
Working...
X