Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
Author Message
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 29,185
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 692
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #1
Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
If the FCS is any guide, the answer is a clear "no".

Since the FCS playoffs expanded to 8 teams in the early 1980s, dynasties have been the rule not the exception. Furthermore, as the playoffs have expanded more, this fact has, if anything, been more pronounced.

E.g., since the FCS playoffs expanded to 20 teams in 2010 and then 24 teams in 2013, we've seen North Dakota State win a whopping 7 of the 9 years. Even Alabama can't match that.

And really, we've seen this throughout the history of the FCS playoffs. In the 1980s, Georgia Southern won 4 titles in 6 years, in the 1990s Youngstown State won 4 titles in 7 years (with Marshall winning 2 in that time frame, and playing in the title game 3 other times), and in the 2000s, before the NDST dynasty, App State won 3 titles in a row.

So .... 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2019 12:49 PM by quo vadis.)
01-06-2019 12:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,939
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 119
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
I think it would because while the talent level of NDSU is huge compared to some of those FCS playoff teams Alabama isn't that far ahead talent wise over the Top 10.

If Alabama doesn't show up in a game they are capable of losing to any SEC team. The same I don't think can be said by NDSU in the MVC FB Conference. They can be pedestrian and still win.

Eight of course also interjects the possibility of an injury which definitely could be enough to take the #1 team out IMO.
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2019 01:03 PM by Kittonhead.)
01-06-2019 01:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 30,802
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 772
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
Saban gets more mulligans. He used them to win in 2011 and 2017. But on the other hand, he has to win 3 straight, not just one or two.

There will be schools that show up every year. But they won't necessarily win.
01-06-2019 01:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 27,051
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1147
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 12:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the FCS is any guide, the answer is a clear "no".

Since the FCS playoffs expanded to 8 teams in the early 1980s, dynasties have been the rule not the exception. Furthermore, as the playoffs have expanded more, this fact has, if anything, been more pronounced.

E.g., since the FCS playoffs expanded to 20 teams in 2010 and then 24 teams in 2013, we've seen North Dakota State win a whopping 7 of the 9 years. Even Alabama can't match that.

And really, we've seen this throughout the history of the FCS playoffs. In the 1980s, Georgia Southern won 4 titles in 6 years, in the 1990s Youngstown State won 4 titles in 7 years (with Marshall winning 2 in that time frame, and playing in the title game 3 other times), and in the 2000s, before the NDST dynasty, App State won 3 titles in a row.

So .... 07-coffee3

Right. If they are truly the best teams--then no. Those same teams would still continue to win. However, I do think that opening it up to more teams would tend to spread the talent around more as recruits realize you can get to the playoff from destinations other than Alabama. I also think we will find that the those other 4 teams offer more of a challenge than many think. We have already seen the #4 seed win 50% of the time in the CFP. So already, we have multiple champions that would not have even been in the playoff during the BCS era. Once it expands to 8 team, I suspect it wont take long at all before a team from seeds #4-8 wins it.
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2019 03:29 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-06-2019 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,623
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 421
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #5
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
On any given day, the best team does not always win. Upsets happen. So the more games you must win in any given tournament, the more likely the best team will be upset and an inferior team will win the championship. That's simple statistics.

We see this all the time in college basketball, where the best team must win six games in a row to become champion. It is very common that the best team is not the champion.

The goal of the CFP is NOT to find out which team is the best. No tournament can do that. It is simply to produce a champion, which is a very different thing from the "best".
01-06-2019 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 4,699
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 145
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #6
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
No it probably wouldn’t stop it totally, but it would add more variables like injuries, bad calls, mistakes, etc. which could cause upsets.

FCS has a clear juggernaut, plus there are a bunch of teams that don’t offer scholarships or full scholarships.

I think the gate and TV money is too great for teams to cut down the reg season and substitute an NCAA sanctioned tournament that features every conference champ at the FBS level. It’s unfortunate, but that’s the way the oblong inflatable pigskin bounces.
01-06-2019 03:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Kittonhead Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,939
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 119
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 03:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-06-2019 12:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the FCS is any guide, the answer is a clear "no".

Since the FCS playoffs expanded to 8 teams in the early 1980s, dynasties have been the rule not the exception. Furthermore, as the playoffs have expanded more, this fact has, if anything, been more pronounced.

E.g., since the FCS playoffs expanded to 20 teams in 2010 and then 24 teams in 2013, we've seen North Dakota State win a whopping 7 of the 9 years. Even Alabama can't match that.

And really, we've seen this throughout the history of the FCS playoffs. In the 1980s, Georgia Southern won 4 titles in 6 years, in the 1990s Youngstown State won 4 titles in 7 years (with Marshall winning 2 in that time frame, and playing in the title game 3 other times), and in the 2000s, before the NDST dynasty, App State won 3 titles in a row.

So .... 07-coffee3

Right. If they are truly the best teams--then no. Those same teams would still continue to win. However, I do think that opening it up to more teams would tend to spread the talent around more as recruits realize you can get to the playoff from destinations other than Alabama.

That too.
01-06-2019 03:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
kurtrundell Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 54
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation: 6
I Root For: KU
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
One way to create parity in college football is to cut scholarships from 85 to about 65. The Alabamas, LSUs, Oklahomas and Clemsons wouldn't be 4 deep at every position -- those backups would go elsewhere to play, thus theoreatically spreading the wealth of talent to lesser teams.
01-06-2019 03:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,012
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 112
I Root For: tOSU SJSU
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #9
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
The answer is, in the short term, of say 2 or 3 years, NO.

But over the long run YES. 8 teams tells pre-NFL players they can make the Playoffs from any of the P5 conferences. This would especially help the P12 which only held on to 17 of the top 25 California players this year -- they are battling especially Alabama, Texas, Penn State and Ohio State to keep players home.

I also think it will spread talent more since the CCGs will mean something with a bid on the line. More players will see value in being on the 2nd, 3rd or 4th school in a conference, since they have a fair shot at the CCG.

I also think we are in an era where Nick Saban is far ahead of everyone else in organization. But others are catching up (it will take 4 years after they are organizationally on par with the 'tide to match them on the field; some are somewhere in that 5 year window already). We are at peak Saban, it doesn't go up from here (he is also turning 68, so we are in the last maybe 5 years of his reign).
01-06-2019 03:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 14,328
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 506
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #10
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 12:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?

At least 9 times out of 10, the winner is going to be one of those 25 teams listed here that have both >100 million in annual athletic revenue and consistently top recruiting. Other teams could break into that group only by increasing athletic revenue to that amount and consistently recruiting as well as those teams. Increasing the playoff size to 8 won't change the group from which we get the final #1.
01-06-2019 03:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kaplony Offline
Palmetto State Deplorable
*

Posts: 21,567
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 1965
I Root For: Newberry
Location: SC
Post: #11
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 03:30 PM)kurtrundell Wrote:  One way to create parity in college football is to cut scholarships from 85 to about 65. The Alabamas, LSUs, Oklahomas and Clemsons wouldn't be 4 deep at every position -- those backups would go elsewhere to play, thus theoreatically spreading the wealth of talent to lesser teams.

You mean like it did when it was dropped from 95 to 85 between 1993 and 1995?
01-06-2019 04:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,927
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 606
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Charlotte, NC
Post: #12
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 04:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(01-06-2019 03:30 PM)kurtrundell Wrote:  One way to create parity in college football is to cut scholarships from 85 to about 65. The Alabamas, LSUs, Oklahomas and Clemsons wouldn't be 4 deep at every position -- those backups would go elsewhere to play, thus theoreatically spreading the wealth of talent to lesser teams.

You mean like it did when it was dropped from 95 to 85 between 1993 and 1995?

That cut wasn't nearly deep enough to create parity... all that really did was cut some legacy players who didn't belong on the field anyway. If you want to create parity, you must cut into depth.
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2019 06:30 PM by Hokie Mark.)
01-06-2019 06:30 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 18,445
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1277
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 03:25 PM)ken d Wrote:  On any given day, the best team does not always win. Upsets happen. So the more games you must win in any given tournament, the more likely the best team will be upset and an inferior team will win the championship. That's simple statistics.

We see this all the time in college basketball, where the best team must win six games in a row to become champion. It is very common that the best team is not the champion.

The goal of the CFP is NOT to find out which team is the best. No tournament can do that. It is simply to produce a champion, which is a very different thing from the "best".

That's not all together a fair comparison. In basketball you have a regular season to win, a conference tourney to win, and a national tourney to win. In basketball there are a lot more schools who play well enough to knock off a contender who has a star that is cold shooting on any given game. Most of the games are within 5 buckets or less. And schools could face opponents multiple times in a season.

In football (at least until very recently) there were no rematches. Ten points can usually take 8 minutes to produce if your offense is hot. 10 points in basketball can be scored in 2 minutes of normal play. It's harder to upset a strong contender in football unless a key injury occurs and even then it might not be enough depending upon when in the game the injury occurred.

By pushing out the season via playoff expansion statistically the only thing that really changes is the greater risk of injury. If it happens to a key player then yes expanding the playoffs will lead statistically to a greater chance of a loss.

However, in football the truly elite teams are seldom 4, let alone 8. All the extra rounds of games will do is extend the season. The difference between the top 2 or 3 seeds and the 6th, 7th, and 8th seeds will likely be significant. The only really interesting game that would develop might be the 4th & 5th seeds.

Is it worth expanding to determine that spot? I would argue that history proves that in the majority of seasons the answer would be no.
01-06-2019 07:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 18,445
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1277
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 06:30 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(01-06-2019 04:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  
(01-06-2019 03:30 PM)kurtrundell Wrote:  One way to create parity in college football is to cut scholarships from 85 to about 65. The Alabamas, LSUs, Oklahomas and Clemsons wouldn't be 4 deep at every position -- those backups would go elsewhere to play, thus theoreatically spreading the wealth of talent to lesser teams.

You mean like it did when it was dropped from 95 to 85 between 1993 and 1995?

That cut wasn't nearly deep enough to create parity... all that really did was cut some legacy players who didn't belong on the field anyway. If you want to create parity, you must cut into depth.

The public doesn't like parity. They love and hate dynasties but watch the games anyway. What has been proven in almost every sport is that they don't watch parity.

Besides if you limited everyone to 66 scholarships, enough for 3 deep at every position but kicker, the same schools (the ones with effective coaches) would still win. They would still recruit coachable kids, still teach them to play well, and still win.

To hell with parity. That's socialism's answer to everything. Parity is participation trophies. Parity is average. Parity doesn't excite. Parity is an excuse for losing. Parity is absolutely abhorrent to anyone who ever played for the enjoyment of winning. And the day we settle for parity is the day this country ceases to exist. We should exile anyone here who wants parity and should destroy any system designed to produce it!

What all of us should do is to insist on the pursuit of excellence. Strive to win all of the time. And recognize those who give their all in pursuit of it. That's what made us great. It sure as hell was not the pursuit of parity.
(This post was last modified: 01-06-2019 07:28 PM by JRsec.)
01-06-2019 07:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 30,802
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 772
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 07:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-06-2019 03:25 PM)ken d Wrote:  On any given day, the best team does not always win. Upsets happen. So the more games you must win in any given tournament, the more likely the best team will be upset and an inferior team will win the championship. That's simple statistics.

We see this all the time in college basketball, where the best team must win six games in a row to become champion. It is very common that the best team is not the champion.

The goal of the CFP is NOT to find out which team is the best. No tournament can do that. It is simply to produce a champion, which is a very different thing from the "best".

That's not all together a fair comparison. In basketball you have a regular season to win, a conference tourney to win, and a national tourney to win. In basketball there are a lot more schools who play well enough to knock off a contender who has a star that is cold shooting on any given game. Most of the games are within 5 buckets or less. And schools could face opponents multiple times in a season.

In football (at least until very recently) there were no rematches. Ten points can usually take 8 minutes to produce if your offense is hot. 10 points in basketball can be scored in 2 minutes of normal play. It's harder to upset a strong contender in football unless a key injury occurs and even then it might not be enough depending upon when in the game the injury occurred.

By pushing out the season via playoff expansion statistically the only thing that really changes is the greater risk of injury. If it happens to a key player then yes expanding the playoffs will lead statistically to a greater chance of a loss.

However, in football the truly elite teams are seldom 4, let alone 8. All the extra rounds of games will do is extend the season. The difference between the top 2 or 3 seeds and the 6th, 7th, and 8th seeds will likely be significant. The only really interesting game that would develop might be the 4th & 5th seeds.

Is it worth expanding to determine that spot? I would argue that history proves that in the majority of seasons the answer would be no.

You aren't expanding based on the "majority." You want that #5 or #6 or #7 team who isn't the best on a beauty contest but really is the best team gets a chance to prove it on the field.

2007, 2008, 2014 are all examples where the best team may not have been in the top 4.
01-06-2019 07:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 14,328
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 506
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #16
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 07:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  By pushing out the season via playoff expansion statistically the only thing that really changes is the greater risk of injury.

Not quite. It's true that the final winner would likely come from the small circle of best-advantaged programs mentioned above, but just adding the extra playoff round would make it more difficult for one team to win several straight titles or 5 in 8 years or anything like that.

This is one area in which there's a valid comparison to the basketball tournament. The same relatively small group of teams produces the NCAA tournament champ at least 9 times out of 10, but it's much more difficult than it used to be for one great team to win out than it was when the tournament was smaller. When UCLA won 10 times in 11 years, they had to win 4 games to win the first 9 of those tournaments (5 games in the last one). Since the tournament expanded to 64 and every champ has had to win 6 games, no team has won the title more than twice in any stretch of 10 seasons.
01-06-2019 07:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 18,445
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1277
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 07:39 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(01-06-2019 07:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-06-2019 03:25 PM)ken d Wrote:  On any given day, the best team does not always win. Upsets happen. So the more games you must win in any given tournament, the more likely the best team will be upset and an inferior team will win the championship. That's simple statistics.

We see this all the time in college basketball, where the best team must win six games in a row to become champion. It is very common that the best team is not the champion.

The goal of the CFP is NOT to find out which team is the best. No tournament can do that. It is simply to produce a champion, which is a very different thing from the "best".

That's not all together a fair comparison. In basketball you have a regular season to win, a conference tourney to win, and a national tourney to win. In basketball there are a lot more schools who play well enough to knock off a contender who has a star that is cold shooting on any given game. Most of the games are within 5 buckets or less. And schools could face opponents multiple times in a season.

In football (at least until very recently) there were no rematches. Ten points can usually take 8 minutes to produce if your offense is hot. 10 points in basketball can be scored in 2 minutes of normal play. It's harder to upset a strong contender in football unless a key injury occurs and even then it might not be enough depending upon when in the game the injury occurred.

By pushing out the season via playoff expansion statistically the only thing that really changes is the greater risk of injury. If it happens to a key player then yes expanding the playoffs will lead statistically to a greater chance of a loss.

However, in football the truly elite teams are seldom 4, let alone 8. All the extra rounds of games will do is extend the season. The difference between the top 2 or 3 seeds and the 6th, 7th, and 8th seeds will likely be significant. The only really interesting game that would develop might be the 4th & 5th seeds.

Is it worth expanding to determine that spot? I would argue that history proves that in the majority of seasons the answer would be no.

You aren't expanding based on the "majority." You want that #5 or #6 or #7 team who isn't the best on a beauty contest but really is the best team gets a chance to prove it on the field.

2007, 2008, 2014 are all examples where the best team may not have been in the top 4.

That is statistically still a small percentage. But, it is the only good reason I've heard.
01-06-2019 07:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,623
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 421
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #18
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 07:19 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-06-2019 03:25 PM)ken d Wrote:  On any given day, the best team does not always win. Upsets happen. So the more games you must win in any given tournament, the more likely the best team will be upset and an inferior team will win the championship. That's simple statistics.

We see this all the time in college basketball, where the best team must win six games in a row to become champion. It is very common that the best team is not the champion.

The goal of the CFP is NOT to find out which team is the best. No tournament can do that. It is simply to produce a champion, which is a very different thing from the "best".

That's not all together a fair comparison. In basketball you have a regular season to win, a conference tourney to win, and a national tourney to win. In basketball there are a lot more schools who play well enough to knock off a contender who has a star that is cold shooting on any given game. Most of the games are within 5 buckets or less. And schools could face opponents multiple times in a season.

In football (at least until very recently) there were no rematches. Ten points can usually take 8 minutes to produce if your offense is hot. 10 points in basketball can be scored in 2 minutes of normal play. It's harder to upset a strong contender in football unless a key injury occurs and even then it might not be enough depending upon when in the game the injury occurred.

By pushing out the season via playoff expansion statistically the only thing that really changes is the greater risk of injury. If it happens to a key player then yes expanding the playoffs will lead statistically to a greater chance of a loss.

However, in football the truly elite teams are seldom 4, let alone 8. All the extra rounds of games will do is extend the season. The difference between the top 2 or 3 seeds and the 6th, 7th, and 8th seeds will likely be significant. The only really interesting game that would develop might be the 4th & 5th seeds.

Is it worth expanding to determine that spot? I would argue that history proves that in the majority of seasons the answer would be no.

There are other reasons for upsets besides injuries. As long as there is a possibility for upsets, then it is simple math to conclude that the more times the best teams are exposed to the possibility of an upset, the more times upsets will actually occur.

That's not to say that the champions in expanded tournaments will be a team other than one of the usual suspects. It only means that the one "best" team in any given year will have a greater chance of being upset if they play three games than if they play only two.

If the team that is truly the eighth best in the field (regardless of where a flawed seeding process actually seeds them) were to upset their first round opponent, they are still highly unlikely to win the tournament. Pulling off three upsets in a row over the best competition is statistically highly unlikely, and might never occur in any of our lifetimes.

The only argument IMO for expanding to eight teams is that there is a slightly smaller chance that a team that actually could win the tournament would be left out by the selection process. At four teams, that chance is greater than zero. At eight, the chance is very close to zero. It is entirely reasonable to imagine that at least one, and maybe two actual CFP champions could have been ranked #5 by the selection committee and left out of the field.

The question is whether that small chance is worth dealing with whatever negatives coaches, AD's or university presidents perceive to exist with an expanded field.
01-06-2019 08:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Shox Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 388
Joined: Oct 2007
Reputation: 20
I Root For: Wichita State
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
Your logic is backwards. It doesn't matter if NDSU wins it 10 times in a row. Every team with a pulse makes the FCS playoffs and knowone can ***** that they didn't get their shot. It's complete BS that a large majority of teams in FBS are not eligible for the cfb because they lack star power and pedigree.
01-06-2019 11:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ChrisLords Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,423
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 94
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location: Earth
Post: #20
RE: Would expansion to 8 teams stop "the same teams winning all the time"?
(01-06-2019 12:48 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  If the FCS is any guide, the answer is a clear "no".

Since the FCS playoffs expanded to 8 teams in the early 1980s, dynasties have been the rule not the exception. Furthermore, as the playoffs have expanded more, this fact has, if anything, been more pronounced.

E.g., since the FCS playoffs expanded to 20 teams in 2010 and then 24 teams in 2013, we've seen North Dakota State win a whopping 7 of the 9 years. Even Alabama can't match that.

And really, we've seen this throughout the history of the FCS playoffs. In the 1980s, Georgia Southern won 4 titles in 6 years, in the 1990s Youngstown State won 4 titles in 7 years (with Marshall winning 2 in that time frame, and playing in the title game 3 other times), and in the 2000s, before the NDST dynasty, App State won 3 titles in a row.

So .... 07-coffee3

It's not just FCS, in Division III Mary Hardin–Baylor, Mount Union, and Wisconsin–Whitewater have won 20 of the last 23 championships. In division II, Valdosta State, Northwest Missouri State, and Grand Valley State have won 13 of the last 21 years and a few other teams have won 2 or 3 championships also. So, it's a trend that a select few teams will repeatedly win the championship.
(This post was last modified: 01-07-2019 08:29 PM by ChrisLords.)
01-07-2019 12:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.