Page 1 of 1

Theoretical 20 Team Field

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:09 am
by ToTheLeft
AQ's:
Big Sky: Montana
CAA: Villanova
MEAC: SC State
MVFC: Southern Illinois
OVC: Eastern Illinois
Patriot League: Holy Cross
SoCon: Appalachian State
SLC: Stephen F. Austin
Big South: Liberty
NEC: CCSU

At-Larges:
William and Mary
New Hampshire
Richmond
SDSU
UNI
Elon
McNeese St.
EWU
Weber
Lafayette

Last 4 Out:
FAMU
Colgate
Albany
ODU? Drake? Marist?

"Play-in Games"

Elon at Liberty
CCSU at Lafayette
Holy Cross at EIU
EWU at SFA

Seeds:
1. SIU (plays winner of HC/EIU)
2. Montana (plays winner of EWU/SFA)
3. Nova (plays winner of CCSU/Laffy)
4. Richmond (plays winner of Elon/Liberty)

Other 2nd Round Games:
UNH @ SCSU
William and Mary @ App St.
McNeese St. @ SDSU
Weber @ UNI

Re: Theoretical 20 Team Field

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:49 am
by kemajic
Why? There are 16 spots; the playoff field increases to 20 in 2010 when the NC game moves to January.

Re: Theoretical 20 Team Field

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:53 am
by ToTheLeft
That's why I did it. Just to see what it would be like if we had the 20 team field this year.

Re: Theoretical 20 Team Field

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:06 am
by GrizMonster
kemajic wrote:Why? There are 16 spots; the playoff field increases to 20 in 2010 when the NC game moves to January.

Why not? Isn't this board full of speculation on a number of things? I think its pretty cool.

Re: Theoretical 20 Team Field

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:17 am
by ToTheLeft
And it goes to show how thin the field gets after 16-18. The fact that Marist and Drake are realistically in the discussion tells you a lot.

Re: Theoretical 20 Team Field

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:17 am
by putter
Personally I think the expansion will be good for the FCS. The more excitement created in other conferences that get AQ will be a boost to the FCS and whether those teams from the NEC and Big South are that competitive is irrelevant. The cream will always rise to the top.

Re: Theoretical 20 Team Field

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:20 am
by danefan
ToTheLeft wrote:And it goes to show how thin the field gets after 16-18. The fact that Marist and Drake are realistically in the discussion tells you a lot.
This year in particular it becomes problematic because of the # of teams playing two FBS teams and good DII teams.

I really think the Committee needs to adopt a "counter-type" policy when the playoffs expand in 2010. One game against a DII that offers ~25 scholarships should count the same as a DI win.

This will expand the pool for quality at-large bids.