Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

11/14/2011 GPI Top 25
Rank, School, Rating, Change
1. North Dakota State (2.57) -0
2. Sam Houston State (2.86) -0
3T. Georgia Southern (3.14) +1
3T. Northern Iowa (3.14) -1
5. Montana State (3.43) -1
6T. Appalachian State (9.14) +1
6T. Wofford (9.14) -0
8. Montana (9.43) -0
9. Lehigh (10.00) +1
10. Maine (10.29) +1
11. Towson (10.71) +3
12. Illinois State (13.43) +1
13. Indiana State (15.00) +2
14. New Hampshire (15.14) -5
15T. Old Dominion (15.86) +1
15T. Youngstown State (15.86) +7
17. Harvard (17.86) -0
18. Central Arkansas (18.71) +2
19. Chattanooga (19.14) -1
20. Furman (21.29) -9
21. Portland State (22.71) -2
22. James Madison (23.00) +1
23. Delaware (24.29) +2
24. Samford (24.57) NEW
25. South Dakota (25.14) NEW

Conference Ranking:
Rank, League, Total Average
1. Southern Conference (25.87)
2. Missouri Valley Football Conference (26.41)
3. Colonial Athletic Association (31.51)
4. Great West Conference (32.32)
5. Big Sky Conference (36.89)
6. Southland Conference (46.37)
7. Patriot League (48.82)
8. Ohio Valley Conference (52.02)
9. Independents (58.11)
10. Ivy League (58.80)
11. Big South Conference (61.82)
12. Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference (67.06)
13. Northeast Conference (71.54)
14. Pioneer Football League (76.29)
15. Southwestern Athletic Conference (78.20)

GannonFan wrote:Yep, there's a reason why the GPI is not used for anything (er, technically it's part of the consideration for the committee when it comes to evaluating teams from the Pioneer for bridge consideration, but even then it's not the GPI being shown here and let's face it, Pioneer teams are getting in anyway). The GPI is essentially worthless.

lakesbison wrote:GPI is allright #1 team looks fine. #35? thats even too high for the naia 'ers

GannonFan wrote:Yep, there's a reason why the GPI is not used for anything (er, technically it's part of the consideration for the committee when it comes to evaluating teams from the Pioneer for bridge consideration, but even then it's not the GPI being shown here and let's face it, Pioneer teams are getting in anyway). The GPI is essentially worthless.

"We look at everything that's available to us. We look at the polls, we look at the rankings, the ratings, whatever might be available to us. The one valuable thing about sitting together in the room is you have 10 (other) people who are from various parts of the country who might know some things that don't necessarily show on paper. For example, in a certain game, did they miss a key player, did they miss their quarterback, did they miss a running back?"

cpacmel wrote:Maybe this is a good place to ask a question about what the committee does or doesn't look at. I have read several posts here that say they don't look at the GPI except for the whole Pioneer League thing.

What do you guys make of this then:

http://www.sportsnetwork.com/merge/tsnf ... /index.htm

"We look at everything that's available to us. We look at the polls, we look at the rankings, the ratings, whatever might be available to us. The one valuable thing about sitting together in the room is you have 10 (other) people who are from various parts of the country who might know some things that don't necessarily show on paper. For example, in a certain game, did they miss a key player, did they miss their quarterback, did they miss a running back, or did they win on a fluke 4th and 29 play after being outplayed the entire game?"

Jonathan (Charlotte): Could you tell us what factors into determining a seed and what does not factor?


John McCutcheon: That is a great question. The criteria we use to evaluate which teams get the top seeds are the same as those used to determine which teams get an at-large bid. Those are overall won-loss record, strength of schedule and quality of wins. External polls and computer rankings are not factored into our decisions. We also consider the input received by the regional advisory committees.