(02-05-2021 01:08 PM)bcp_jmu Wrote:  7 in the north and 4 in the south? Even Covid can't make that make sense...only the south has these two game matchups.

https://caasports.com/standings.aspx?path=football

Villanova should be in the south...it's 4 hours from Madison, vs. 3.5 to Elon...at least then it would be 6 / 5

Chalk up another Joey Durr victory

Splitting JMU and Nova is the best chance for the CAA to get two teams in the playoffs. I'm sure that was part of the calculus. Towson's decision to not play was the real screw job on the schedule.

Guys, the reasoning was verbatim provided by Greg Madia in one of his articles back when it was announced. There's no conspiracy theory. It was a result of Towson backing out of the spring.

(02-05-2021 03:02 PM)Potomac Wrote:  Guys, the reasoning was verbatim provided by Greg Madia in one of his articles back when it was announced. There's no conspiracy theory. It was a result of Towson backing out of the spring.

In this day and age this is always a conspiracy theory.

(02-05-2021 03:03 PM)Dukester Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 03:02 PM)Potomac Wrote:  Guys, the reasoning was verbatim provided by Greg Madia in one of his articles back when it was announced. There's no conspiracy theory. It was a result of Towson backing out of the spring.

In this day and age this is always a conspiracy theory.

Doesn’t need to be a conspiracy.
North teams acting in their own best interest.

I agree with bcp it would have been more logical for Villanova or UD to be part of the South. With Towson playing that would have made it a 6-6 split.

There’s also little justification for not having a Conference title game with this format, and from Cig’s comments it seems like something that was discussed and explicitly voted against.

(02-05-2021 03:03 PM)Dukester Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 03:02 PM)Potomac Wrote:  Guys, the reasoning was verbatim provided by Greg Madia in one of his articles back when it was announced. There's no conspiracy theory. It was a result of Towson backing out of the spring.

In this day and age there is always a conspiracy theory.

I suspect if Nova or Delaware wanted to be in the south, or wanted to play non-divisional schedule, they would have pushed for that. Ain't no way they wanted to play JMU if they can avoid it though. With Towson out, this very odd divisional setup kinda fell in place as the thing that everyone can at least live with (if not love in the case of Nova & UDel).

JMUSports has announced that the first two football games will be on regional networks. The Feb 20 game vs Morehead State will have a 12:00 noon start and will be broadcast on NBC Sports Washington. The second games against Robert Morris, also a noon start on Feb 27, will be broadcast on NBC Sports Washington Plus. Both games will also be available on FLO as usual.

https://jmusports.com/news/2021/2/5/jmu-...games.aspx

Brian

(02-05-2021 03:27 PM)HyperDuke Wrote:  I suspect if Nova or Delaware wanted to be in the south, or wanted to play non-divisional schedule, they would have pushed for that. Ain't no way they wanted to play JMU if they can avoid it though. With Towson out, this very odd divisional setup kinda fell in place as the thing that everyone can at least live with (if not love in the case of Nova & UDel).

Just like Flo Sports, I wouldn’t be surprised if JMU and possibly one or two other teams like Elon voted against it. This arrangement is good for the Northern teams and if they all voted for it not much we could do.

If this happens again in future seasons, it’s more than enough reason to leave the CAA.

(02-05-2021 01:00 PM)Dukester Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 12:54 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 10:35 AM)Dukester Wrote:  While I agree we've been stung in the past by the selection committee, I do think it we finish 8-0 we get a top 2 seed. Does the seed matter "as much" if the fans are limited?

As much as we would like to think this way, on what basis would the committee award us the 2 seed?

Our big “power” wins over W&M, RU, and Elon?
Our glorious past playoff runs? (committee says it doesn’t matter)

Only a few things I can think of that would help the committee award us a top 4 seed:
1) if we absolutely blow the doors off every game and win huge
2) if we are one of only 2 or 3 undefeated teams.
3) we win the conference autobid

We probably need all 3 for a good seed.

Committee has previously said they do place weight on winning your conference title, and I can’t recall a top 2 seed that didn’t. This was the justification for seeding Maine higher than JMU.

I'm hoping name recognition, and recent history.

Wish that happened in '18. I have a feeling that even if NDSU SDSU UNI all have 1 loss against each other, the committee would still put all three ahead of us just based on SOS. Chances are Weber is undefeated as well. Villanova really needs to drop a game for us to get a top 4 seed in my opinion. Dont forget about Albany as well, solid year last year and they bring back arguably the best qb in the FCS now that Trey lance is gone

(02-05-2021 07:02 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 01:00 PM)Dukester Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 12:54 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 10:35 AM)Dukester Wrote:  While I agree we've been stung in the past by the selection committee, I do think it we finish 8-0 we get a top 2 seed. Does the seed matter "as much" if the fans are limited?

As much as we would like to think this way, on what basis would the committee award us the 2 seed?

Our big “power” wins over W&M, RU, and Elon?
Our glorious past playoff runs? (committee says it doesn’t matter)

Only a few things I can think of that would help the committee award us a top 4 seed:
1) if we absolutely blow the doors off every game and win huge
2) if we are one of only 2 or 3 undefeated teams.
3) we win the conference autobid

We probably need all 3 for a good seed.

Committee has previously said they do place weight on winning your conference title, and I can’t recall a top 2 seed that didn’t. This was the justification for seeding Maine higher than JMU.

I'm hoping name recognition, and recent history.

Wish that happened in '18. I have a feeling that even if NDSU SDSU UNI all have 1 loss against each other, the committee would still put all three ahead of us just based on SOS. Chances are Weber is undefeated as well. Villanova really needs to drop a game for us to get a top 4 seed in my opinion. Dont forget about Albany as well, solid year last year and they bring back arguably the best qb in the FCS now that Trey lance is gone

SOS is going to be really screwy this year. I would think a very large part of the formulas rely on OOC games to help build comparisons between the conferences. (CAA teams beating up on NEC/Pioneer teams sets the CAA teams at a higher value.) With most conferences being insulated in conference-only schedules, there is no way to get those comparisons into those numbers. Why would an undefeated San Diego be ranked any lower than an undefeated NDSU? (We certainly know NDSU should be higher based off of history, but do the computers have that info?

(02-05-2021 07:23 PM)NH/JMU Saxkow Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 07:02 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 01:00 PM)Dukester Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 12:54 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 10:35 AM)Dukester Wrote:  While I agree we've been stung in the past by the selection committee, I do think it we finish 8-0 we get a top 2 seed. Does the seed matter "as much" if the fans are limited?

As much as we would like to think this way, on what basis would the committee award us the 2 seed?

Our big “power” wins over W&M, RU, and Elon?
Our glorious past playoff runs? (committee says it doesn’t matter)

Only a few things I can think of that would help the committee award us a top 4 seed:
1) if we absolutely blow the doors off every game and win huge
2) if we are one of only 2 or 3 undefeated teams.
3) we win the conference autobid

We probably need all 3 for a good seed.

Committee has previously said they do place weight on winning your conference title, and I can’t recall a top 2 seed that didn’t. This was the justification for seeding Maine higher than JMU.

I'm hoping name recognition, and recent history.

Wish that happened in '18. I have a feeling that even if NDSU SDSU UNI all have 1 loss against each other, the committee would still put all three ahead of us just based on SOS. Chances are Weber is undefeated as well. Villanova really needs to drop a game for us to get a top 4 seed in my opinion. Dont forget about Albany as well, solid year last year and they bring back arguably the best qb in the FCS now that Trey lance is gone

SOS is going to be really screwy this year. I would think a very large part of the formulas rely on OOC games to help build comparisons between the conferences. (CAA teams beating up on NEC/Pioneer teams sets the CAA teams at a higher value.) With most conferences being insulated in conference-only schedules, there is no way to get those comparisons into those numbers. Why would an undefeated San Diego be ranked any lower than an undefeated NDSU? (We certainly know NDSU should be higher based off of history, but do the computers have that info?

It'll factor in ranked teams and unless we loss a game there is no chance we play a ranked team this year. The north CAA division will have 4 ranked teams. MVFC will have 4 ranked teams that play each other as well

(02-05-2021 07:46 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 07:23 PM)NH/JMU Saxkow Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 07:02 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 01:00 PM)Dukester Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 12:54 PM)JMURocks Wrote:  As much as we would like to think this way, on what basis would the committee award us the 2 seed?

Our big “power” wins over W&M, RU, and Elon?
Our glorious past playoff runs? (committee says it doesn’t matter)

Only a few things I can think of that would help the committee award us a top 4 seed:
1) if we absolutely blow the doors off every game and win huge
2) if we are one of only 2 or 3 undefeated teams.
3) we win the conference autobid

We probably need all 3 for a good seed.

Committee has previously said they do place weight on winning your conference title, and I can’t recall a top 2 seed that didn’t. This was the justification for seeding Maine higher than JMU.

I'm hoping name recognition, and recent history.

Wish that happened in '18. I have a feeling that even if NDSU SDSU UNI all have 1 loss against each other, the committee would still put all three ahead of us just based on SOS. Chances are Weber is undefeated as well. Villanova really needs to drop a game for us to get a top 4 seed in my opinion. Dont forget about Albany as well, solid year last year and they bring back arguably the best qb in the FCS now that Trey lance is gone

SOS is going to be really screwy this year. I would think a very large part of the formulas rely on OOC games to help build comparisons between the conferences. (CAA teams beating up on NEC/Pioneer teams sets the CAA teams at a higher value.) With most conferences being insulated in conference-only schedules, there is no way to get those comparisons into those numbers. Why would an undefeated San Diego be ranked any lower than an undefeated NDSU? (We certainly know NDSU should be higher based off of history, but do the computers have that info?

It'll factor in ranked teams and unless we loss a game there is no chance we play a ranked team this year. The north CAA division will have 4 ranked teams. MVFC will have 4 ranked teams that play each other as well

That seems really odd that a measurement that is supposed to be objective (SOS) factors in a completely subjective (rankings) aspect...

(02-05-2021 08:22 PM)NH/JMU Saxkow Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 07:46 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 07:23 PM)NH/JMU Saxkow Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 07:02 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 01:00 PM)Dukester Wrote:  I'm hoping name recognition, and recent history.

Wish that happened in '18. I have a feeling that even if NDSU SDSU UNI all have 1 loss against each other, the committee would still put all three ahead of us just based on SOS. Chances are Weber is undefeated as well. Villanova really needs to drop a game for us to get a top 4 seed in my opinion. Dont forget about Albany as well, solid year last year and they bring back arguably the best qb in the FCS now that Trey lance is gone

SOS is going to be really screwy this year. I would think a very large part of the formulas rely on OOC games to help build comparisons between the conferences. (CAA teams beating up on NEC/Pioneer teams sets the CAA teams at a higher value.) With most conferences being insulated in conference-only schedules, there is no way to get those comparisons into those numbers. Why would an undefeated San Diego be ranked any lower than an undefeated NDSU? (We certainly know NDSU should be higher based off of history, but do the computers have that info?

It'll factor in ranked teams and unless we loss a game there is no chance we play a ranked team this year. The north CAA division will have 4 ranked teams. MVFC will have 4 ranked teams that play each other as well

That seems really odd that a measurement that is supposed to be objective (SOS) factors in a completely subjective (rankings) aspect...

So you dont see a difference in a team playing #8 Nova vs unranked Richmond?

(02-05-2021 07:23 PM)NH/JMU Saxkow Wrote:  SOS is going to be really screwy this year. I would think a very large part of the formulas rely on OOC games to help build comparisons between the conferences. (CAA teams beating up on NEC/Pioneer teams sets the CAA teams at a higher value.) With most conferences being insulated in conference-only schedules, there is no way to get those comparisons into those numbers. Why would an undefeated San Diego be ranked any lower than an undefeated NDSU? (We certainly know NDSU should be higher based off of history, but do the computers have that info?

This is a very interesting point.

As much as i dislike it, as I understand things, the Sagarin does rely on historical stats, particularly when the teams are not "well connected"

However, I do not believe the SRS, which is the official metric used by the committee has this and that ranking (and associated SOS) could be mess for that reason. The committee seems to weigh SRS heavily in seeding, but is not technically bound to do so.

(02-05-2021 07:46 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  It'll factor in ranked teams and unless we loss a game there is no chance we play a ranked team this year. The north CAA division will have 4 ranked teams. MVFC will have 4 ranked teams that play each other as well

While i agree with your overall point, and believe we are at a disadvantage, the committee does not officially use any of the public polls/rankings, and the SRS does not incorporate the public polls.

The committee does have their own (private) ranking poll, produced by regional subcommittee members, and also uses the SRS scores.

They have in the past given one or two "sneak peeks" at their top ranked teams. The SRS is not published until after the selections are done.

Just as a reference, here was the NCAA FCS SRS computed scores for 2019. The committee doesn't always strictly follow this, but it is officially a factor and they seem to give it weight in seeding. The scores did justify NDSU as #1 and JMU as #2 seeds. It also justified the high seeds awarded to Sacramento St, Weber, Montana and Montana St. Teams don't get any benefit from prior year ranking.

1 North Dakota St. 2
2 James Madison 1.74
3 Montana 1.58
4 Sacramento St. 1.57
5 Weber St. 1.51
6 Montana St. 1.25
7 Dartmouth 1.14
8 Yale 1.12
9 South Dakota St. 1.02
10 UNI 0.93

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/football/f...ngs-system

(02-05-2021 10:52 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  So you dont see a difference in a team playing #8 Nova vs unranked Richmond?

15 months since the last time any of those teams took the field? No - I don't.

I have paid enough attention to the polls over the years to see how completely awful they are once you get past the top 2-3 teams in I-AA. The voters are typically uninformed about teams outside their conferences and likely do less research than I do when I write my playoff articles. That "#8" means absolutely nothing to me at this point.

This is why teams playing outside of their conference is so crucial - it allows for better comparisons. We can guess that Nova will be a lot better than Richmond this Spring, but it really is no more than a guess. Common opponents help us to judge. And, of course, head-to-head matchups give us solid answers. But most of the teams are only playing within their confined bubbles. Looking at the CAA (from what I can tell), JMU and Elon are the only teams with 2 OOC games, Delaware and URI have their one in-state rival games, and the other 7 CAA teams playing have no OOC games.

It's even worse in the MVC - none of them are playing OOC games in the Spring.

With (almost) every team will be confined to their bubbles until the playoffs, and the lower number of At-Large spots, I think the Committee will start with the "winners" of each bubble. (So in the case of the CAA, I think the CAA North champ and the CAA South champ will both get spots - as long as one team clearly finishes ahead of the others. If all teams finish 3-3 in the CAA South, for example, no one will get in.)

(02-06-2021 12:23 AM)NH/JMU Saxkow Wrote:  With (almost) every team will be confined to their bubbles until the playoffs, and the lower number of At-Large spots, I think the Committee will start with the "winners" of each bubble. (So in the case of the CAA, I think the CAA North champ and the CAA South champ will both get spots - as long as one team clearly finishes ahead of the others. If all teams finish 3-3 in the CAA South, for example, no one will get in.)

Interesting theory, and things could play out that way if the committee recognizes the issues with the SRS given the teams are not "connected"

While this might improve our odds of making the field, a high seed for JMU still seems improbable to me based on the "resume" we will have.

Sorting out seeds will be a big mess. Suspect the official conference champions of MVC, CAA, and Big Sky will get high slots, though it could become very political without any good objective/neutral data. Or, it could appear almost random if they rely on a metric (SRS) that is skewed due to teams being disconnected.

As much as it pains me to say this, this is a season where for seeding the committee *should* consider independent metrics that incorporate historical performance, such as the Sagarin.

Whether or not the committee recognizes the unique issues associated with the disconnected "bubbles" and how they choose to address that is the million dollar question.

(02-06-2021 12:23 AM)NH/JMU Saxkow Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 10:52 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  So you dont see a difference in a team playing #8 Nova vs unranked Richmond?

15 months since the last time any of those teams took the field? No - I don't.

I have paid enough attention to the polls over the years to see how completely awful they are once you get past the top 2-3 teams in I-AA. The voters are typically uninformed about teams outside their conferences and likely do less research than I do when I write my playoff articles. That "#8" means absolutely nothing to me at this point.

This is why teams playing outside of their conference is so crucial - it allows for better comparisons. We can guess that Nova will be a lot better than Richmond this Spring, but it really is no more than a guess. Common opponents help us to judge. And, of course, head-to-head matchups give us solid answers. But most of the teams are only playing within their confined bubbles. Looking at the CAA (from what I can tell), JMU and Elon are the only teams with 2 OOC games, Delaware and URI have their one in-state rival games, and the other 7 CAA teams playing have no OOC games.

It's even worse in the MVC - none of them are playing OOC games in the Spring.

With (almost) every team will be confined to their bubbles until the playoffs, and the lower number of At-Large spots, I think the Committee will start with the "winners" of each bubble. (So in the case of the CAA, I think the CAA North champ and the CAA South champ will both get spots - as long as one team clearly finishes ahead of the others. If all teams finish 3-3 in the CAA South, for example, no one will get in.)

The SEC didnt play any OOC games this fall and did seem to be an issue with determining the best teams/conference. Over the last 3 years its gone MVFC, Big Sky and then CAA as the three best conferences with the CAA being the clear 3rd in my opinion. And the CAA's normal OOC schedule mostly includes PL or NEC teams which does nothing to determine comparisons as you said. It matters who you play in conference and we dont play anyone while the CAA north does in fact play teams that in a normal year will be playoff contenders. That is not a guess.
I dont see 3 CAA teams getting in this year so what happens in Nova goes undefeated and say Albany or UNH only has one close loss against Nova? Does JMU still get in by blowing out lesser competition? Chances are yes but I can see the debate happening already and I think its a fair question

(02-06-2021 08:18 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(02-06-2021 12:23 AM)NH/JMU Saxkow Wrote:  

(02-05-2021 10:52 PM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  So you dont see a difference in a team playing #8 Nova vs unranked Richmond?

15 months since the last time any of those teams took the field? No - I don't.

I have paid enough attention to the polls over the years to see how completely awful they are once you get past the top 2-3 teams in I-AA. The voters are typically uninformed about teams outside their conferences and likely do less research than I do when I write my playoff articles. That "#8" means absolutely nothing to me at this point.

This is why teams playing outside of their conference is so crucial - it allows for better comparisons. We can guess that Nova will be a lot better than Richmond this Spring, but it really is no more than a guess. Common opponents help us to judge. And, of course, head-to-head matchups give us solid answers. But most of the teams are only playing within their confined bubbles. Looking at the CAA (from what I can tell), JMU and Elon are the only teams with 2 OOC games, Delaware and URI have their one in-state rival games, and the other 7 CAA teams playing have no OOC games.

It's even worse in the MVC - none of them are playing OOC games in the Spring.

With (almost) every team will be confined to their bubbles until the playoffs, and the lower number of At-Large spots, I think the Committee will start with the "winners" of each bubble. (So in the case of the CAA, I think the CAA North champ and the CAA South champ will both get spots - as long as one team clearly finishes ahead of the others. If all teams finish 3-3 in the CAA South, for example, no one will get in.)

The SEC didnt play any OOC games this fall and did seem to be an issue with determining the best teams/conference. Over the last 3 years its gone MVFC, Big Sky and then CAA as the three best conferences with the CAA being the clear 3rd in my opinion. And the CAA's normal OOC schedule mostly includes PL or NEC teams which does nothing to determine comparisons as you said. It matters who you play in conference and we dont play anyone while the CAA north does in fact play teams that in a normal year will be playoff contenders. That is not a guess.
I dont see 3 CAA teams getting in this year so what happens in Nova goes undefeated and say Albany or UNH only has one close loss against Nova? Does JMU still get in by blowing out lesser competition? Chances are yes but I can see the debate happening already and I think its a fair question

You didn't hear about the controversy with Texas A&M being left out of the playoffs while the ACC got 2 teams in? (ND barely beat Clemson's back-up QB in November, lost convincingly to Clemson in December, but still was picked over fellow one-loss team Texas A&M...and then promptly lost to Alabama while Clemson lost to an Ohio State.)

(And yes, us playing NEC and PL teams do help to set-up an interlocking web with all other teams that the computers would absorb to create comparisons because NEC and PL teams also play teams for the other conferences. The SRS will be meaningless.)

The fact is there is no good way to choose just 4 At-Large teams for a 16-team playoff. Good teams are going to get screwed over - and the Committee knows that. Adding in the scheduling anomalies that will happen this year tells me that the Committee will be forced to throw out the computer formulas and go by as many objective criteria as possible. Picking the CAA North and CAA South champ is one less argument that they will have to have (and defend). You are right that the CAA and MVC will each likely get an At-Large (which will be due solely to historical performances)...so the only real question will be who gets the final 2 spots. (In a normal season, I certainly would agree with you about the Big Sky getting an automatic At-Large, but I don't know about them this year due to at least 5 teams - including both Montanas and Sac St - not playing.) The season games will need to be played out to figure out if anyone stands out.

(And we need to see how many teams don't even complete the season...)