I'd still rather root for a 3 bid BSC scenario than to root for you and Weber to lose out, but your making me nervous.
Yup! I would love to see three from the BSC make it to the playoffs, but it ain't gonna happen this year!
However, there is still a good chance for a BSC at-large bid, especially since the Great West has scheduled and played themselves out of contention.
Weber wins over NAU and Cal Poly would be just as impressive as EWU wins over SUU and NAU. If both Weber and EWU finish with 7 DI wins, the at-large will be a coin toss.
Proud Prince of Purple Pomposity YT is not a communist. He's just a ...young pup.
Four Big Sky teams, EWU, MSU, NAU and WSU all at this point should be deserving of a playoff spot. Which ones get in if any is highly suspect. The committee is a funny bunch and could look at it this way.
EWU---Two tough games left on the road against Southern Utah and Northern Arizona. A tough road, but the Eagles could stay home even winning these games, just due to the fact that they were on a postseason ban at the start of the year. No fault of their own, and the ban has been lifted, but the committee may look past the Eagles just because of this. They won't come out and say it, and most likely would use their ugly loss at home to Weber, but the committee may be looking for excuses in order to avoid establishing precedence in cases of schools who start the year with a ban and end the year without one.
MSU---Should get in with a late win over Montana, but in the eyes of the committee, does the Grizzlies performance last week against Idaho State kind of cheapen a Bobcat win over the Grizzlies? The funny committee could say keeping the Bobcats at home was due mainly to their home game against NAU even with a win over Montana. Weak argument at best, but sometimes they do not make too much sense.
NAU---Probably could make the best argument for inclusion if they beat both WSU on the road and EWU at home. Yet the committee could keep the Jacks home because of their late season loss to Sacramento State, a team that is playing really well but does not have a great national profile. The Jacks, ironically, could benefit from two games played among Great West teams. If UC-Davis beats North Dakota and the Hornets take care of business against the Aggies, NAU's games look impressive. Whether the committee realizes this remains to be seen.
WSU---If they win out, will they go? The Wildcats have two home games, NAU and Cal Poly. What hurts is Cal Poly now is not the same Mustang team that beat South Dakota State early on. Losses to North Dakota and UC-Davis have ruined the Mustangs' season. Therefore, does a win now over Cal Poly look as impressive as when Montana played them? The committee may put the blame on keeping Weber State home on their home loss to Montana State. Like, MSU, weak argument.
At times, the committee seems to be stretching for reasons to keep the Big Sky down and keeping the national profile as a "Montana and the rest" type conference. Last year, they had to take Weber, due to the head to head, then they made sure the conference would only have one team in the semis by placing the Wildcats in the same bracket as Montana. This year, are we as a conference playing for one, two or (gasp) no additional spots in the playoffs? The committee is a funny group and any time your team places their fate in the hand of the committee, be prepared for the results to be not what you wanted.
JALMOND wrote:Four Big Sky teams, EWU, MSU, NAU and WSU all at this point should be deserving of a playoff spot. Which ones get in if any is highly suspect. The committee is a funny bunch and could look at it this way.
EWU---Two tough games left on the road against Southern Utah and Northern Arizona. A tough road, but the Eagles could stay home even winning these games, just due to the fact that they were on a postseason ban at the start of the year. No fault of their own, and the ban has been lifted, but the committee may look past the Eagles just because of this. They won't come out and say it, and most likely would use their ugly loss at home to Weber, but the committee may be looking for excuses in order to avoid establishing precedence in cases of schools who start the year with a ban and end the year without one.
MSU---Should get in with a late win over Montana, but in the eyes of the committee, does the Grizzlies performance last week against Idaho State kind of cheapen a Bobcat win over the Grizzlies? The funny committee could say keeping the Bobcats at home was due mainly to their home game against NAU even with a win over Montana. Weak argument at best, but sometimes they do not make too much sense.
NAU---Probably could make the best argument for inclusion if they beat both WSU on the road and EWU at home. Yet the committee could keep the Jacks home because of their late season loss to Sacramento State, a team that is playing really well but does not have a great national profile. The Jacks, ironically, could benefit from two games played among Great West teams. If UC-Davis beats North Dakota and the Hornets take care of business against the Aggies, NAU's games look impressive. Whether the committee realizes this remains to be seen.
WSU---If they win out, will they go? The Wildcats have two home games, NAU and Cal Poly. What hurts is Cal Poly now is not the same Mustang team that beat South Dakota State early on. Losses to North Dakota and UC-Davis have ruined the Mustangs' season. Therefore, does a win now over Cal Poly look as impressive as when Montana played them? The committee may put the blame on keeping Weber State home on their home loss to Montana State. Like, MSU, weak argument.
At times, the committee seems to be stretching for reasons to keep the Big Sky down and keeping the national profile as a "Montana and the rest" type conference. Last year, they had to take Weber, due to the head to head, then they made sure the conference would only have one team in the semis by placing the Wildcats in the same bracket as Montana. This year, are we as a conference playing for one, two or (gasp) no additional spots in the playoffs? The committee is a funny group and any time your team places their fate in the hand of the committee, be prepared for the results to be not what you wanted.
1. the fact is , there arent enough teams getting into the playoffs... the CAA gets 4 F'ING TEAMS IN? Guess whats gonna happen when they get georgia state & old dom? the top teams will just avoid each other... The big sky has to play each team no matter what...
2. IN ALL FAIRNESS, THERE ARE 5 TEAMS IN THE BIGSKY that should be in the playoffs this year...
3. The fcs playoffs sysytem is CRAP.. The Big Sky gets NO RESPECT, all the conferences aren't even represented, silly distance retrictions, one conference getting 1/4 of the playoff spots!?
4. There should be 24 teams selected for the playoffs & the Big south, great west, pioneer, & nec should get autobids! Anything less is just as bogus as FBS!
EWU FOOTBALL 2004|2005|2010|2012|2013|2014|2016|2018|BigSky Champions EASTERN WASHINGTON|2010 NATIONAL CHAMPIONS
I agree with most of what you said, Falkin. But the GW is just too turbulent right now to justify an auto-bid, and the Pioneer just isn't up to the same standard.
The rest is VERY valid.
SuperHornet's Athletics Hall of Fame includes Jacksonville State kicker Ashley Martin, the first girl to score in a Division I football game. She kicked 3 PATs in a 2001 game for J-State.
JALMOND wrote:Four Big Sky teams, EWU, MSU, NAU and WSU all at this point should be deserving of a playoff spot. Which ones get in if any is highly suspect. The committee is a funny bunch and could look at it this way.
EWU---Two tough games left on the road against Southern Utah and Northern Arizona. A tough road, but the Eagles could stay home even winning these games, just due to the fact that they were on a postseason ban at the start of the year. No fault of their own, and the ban has been lifted, but the committee may look past the Eagles just because of this. They won't come out and say it, and most likely would use their ugly loss at home to Weber, but the committee may be looking for excuses in order to avoid establishing precedence in cases of schools who start the year with a ban and end the year without one.
MSU---Should get in with a late win over Montana, but in the eyes of the committee, does the Grizzlies performance last week against Idaho State kind of cheapen a Bobcat win over the Grizzlies? The funny committee could say keeping the Bobcats at home was due mainly to their home game against NAU even with a win over Montana. Weak argument at best, but sometimes they do not make too much sense.
NAU---Probably could make the best argument for inclusion if they beat both WSU on the road and EWU at home. Yet the committee could keep the Jacks home because of their late season loss to Sacramento State, a team that is playing really well but does not have a great national profile. The Jacks, ironically, could benefit from two games played among Great West teams. If UC-Davis beats North Dakota and the Hornets take care of business against the Aggies, NAU's games look impressive. Whether the committee realizes this remains to be seen.
WSU---If they win out, will they go? The Wildcats have two home games, NAU and Cal Poly. What hurts is Cal Poly now is not the same Mustang team that beat South Dakota State early on. Losses to North Dakota and UC-Davis have ruined the Mustangs' season. Therefore, does a win now over Cal Poly look as impressive as when Montana played them? The committee may put the blame on keeping Weber State home on their home loss to Montana State. Like, MSU, weak argument.
At times, the committee seems to be stretching for reasons to keep the Big Sky down and keeping the national profile as a "Montana and the rest" type conference. Last year, they had to take Weber, due to the head to head, then they made sure the conference would only have one team in the semis by placing the Wildcats in the same bracket as Montana. This year, are we as a conference playing for one, two or (gasp) no additional spots in the playoffs? The committee is a funny group and any time your team places their fate in the hand of the committee, be prepared for the results to be not what you wanted.
Well aren't you just a regular Negative Nancy!
Better than being a Negative Nobody!
Its just that I've been following the antics of the committee not just since 2006 when they kept us home, but even going further back to 1999 when they shipped us to Delaware for the first round (9 am Pacific starting time). Suffice to say, I've never been impressed with the "attitude" shown by the committee to teams out west. I thought I'd give them a pass last year then they put both Weber and Cal Poly in Montana's bracket. Nothing they've done in regard (or disregard) to the Big Sky and the Great West has made sense in the last ten years.
