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

I tried looking it up today. But it's the thing the playoff committee is going to be using and it could have a big impact on who gets in and who gets top 8 seeds. But I could NOT find anything to give me an idea as to where teams stand in it as of now.

I'm sure it's probably a bad power rating system. For some reason "powers that be" that use power rating systems as factors in selection like to use bad ones. But it is what it is and if it's going to have an impact I wish I could see how things are looking.

JohnStOnge wrote:I tried looking it up today. But it's the thing the playoff committee is going to be using and it could have a big impact on who gets in and who gets top 8 seeds. But I could NOT find anything to give me an idea as to where teams stand in it as of now.

I'm sure it's probably a bad power rating system. For some reason "powers that be" that use power rating systems as factors in selection like to use bad ones. But it is what it is and if it's going to have an impact I wish I could see how things are looking.

http://www.footballperspective.com/non- ... -12-weeks/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Non FBS so anyone below FBS. This may not be exactly the same as FCS uses because they have not stated what the cap is on MOV


1 North Dakota St 10 20.8 24.7 45.5 10-0
2 Eastern Illinois 11 21.9 22.2 44.1 10-1
3 NW Missouri St 11 25.2 12.9 38.1 11-0
4 SE Louisiana St 11 15.8 20.2 36 9-2
5 Eastern Washington 11 13.2 21.1 34.3 9-2
6 Towson 11 15.5 17.5 32.9 9-2
7 Villanova 10 8.5 24.2 32.7 5-5
8 Northern Iowa 11 6.4 24.6 31 6-5
9 McNeese St 11 13.3 17.2 30.6 9-2
10 Maine 11 12.2 17.7 29.9 10-1
11 Coastal Carolina 11 18.1 11.5 29.6 10-1
12 Princeton 9 18.8 10.8 29.6 8-1
13 William & Mary 11 7.2 21.7 28.9 7-4
14 Montana 11 14.8 14.1 28.9 9-2
15 Missouri St 12 3.7 24.8 28.5 5-7
16 South Dakota St 11 4.1 24.3 28.5 7-4
17 Youngstown St 11 8.9 19.4 28.3 8-3
18 Sam Houston St 11 12.1 15.8 28 8-3
19 Jacksonville St 11 8.9 18.4 27.3 8-3
20 Old Dominion 11 11.7 15.6 27.3 8-3
21 Southern Illinois 11 0.9 26.1 27 6-5
22 North Alabama 10 19.3 7.3 26.6 8-2
23 New Hampshire 10 7.6 18.4 26 6-4
24 Pittsburg St 11 19.8 6.1 25.9 9-2
25 Bethune-Cookman 11 14 12 25.9 9-2
26 Tennessee St 12 10.6 15.2 25.8 9-3
27 Cal Poly SLO 11 3.2 22.5 25.6 5-6
28 Chattanooga 11 10.5 14.8 25.3 8-3
29 Harvard 9 12 13.3 25.3 8-1
30 South Carolina St 11 13.4 11 24.4 8-3
31 Samford 11 5.8 18.5 24.3 7-4
32 Tennessee-Martin 11 1.9 22.3 24.2 7-4
33 Minn St-Mankato 11 24.7 -0.5 24.2 11-0
34 Colorado St-Pueblo 11 22.8 1.1 23.9 11-0
35 West Texas A&M 11 19.6 4.1 23.7 9-2
36 Fordham 11 12.4 11.2 23.7 10-1
37 Montana St 11 9 14.4 23.4 7-4
38 Northern Arizona 10 3.6 19.8 23.4 8-2
39 Henderson St 11 26.5 -3.4 23.2 11-0
40 Illinois St 11 -4.7 27.5 22.8 5-6
41 Missouri Western 11 10.5 12 22.5 8-3
42 Ohio Dominican 10 21 1.5 22.5 10-0



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I don't know much about the SRS, but my understanding is that it is still in "trial mode." In other words, they are still tweaking it. Also, I believe the FCS playoff committee is planning on using this as the primary poll to decide inclusion to the playoffs, but not for 2013. Therefore, it is moot at this point. We're still stuck with the TSN poll, Sagarin, and the RPI.

LDopaPDX wrote:I don't know much about the SRS, but my understanding is that it is still in "trial mode." In other words, they are still tweaking it. Also, I believe the FCS playoff committee is planning on using this as the primary poll to decide inclusion to the playoffs, but not for 2013. Therefore, it is moot at this point. We're still stuck with the TSN poll, Sagarin, and the RPI.

First I've heard of them not using it this year. But either way the results look similar to the results of power ratings in general. My alma mater, McNeese State, is on the bubble for a top eight seed.

In any case I'm glad they're going to be using something like this in the future. You can see that it's got D-II teams mixed in there with the top 25 FCS teams so that a D-II is not automatically considered a "weak" opponent. Northwest Missouri State is "seen" as a tougher opponent than Arkansas Pine Bluff. And that's how it should be. Way more rational than the way they used to do things.

JohnStOnge wrote:

LDopaPDX wrote:I don't know much about the SRS, but my understanding is that it is still in "trial mode." In other words, they are still tweaking it. Also, I believe the FCS playoff committee is planning on using this as the primary poll to decide inclusion to the playoffs, but not for 2013. Therefore, it is moot at this point. We're still stuck with the TSN poll, Sagarin, and the RPI.

First I've heard of them not using it this year. But either way the results look similar to the results of power ratings in general. My alma mater, McNeese State, is on the bubble for a top eight seed.

In any case I'm glad they're going to be using something like this in the future. You can see that it's got D-II teams mixed in there with the top 25 FCS teams so that a D-II is not automatically considered a "weak" opponent. Northwest Missouri State is "seen" as a tougher opponent than Arkansas Pine Bluff. And that's how it should be. Way more rational than the way they used to do things.

JohnStOnge you have shed some light in a sensible way onto the selections. I am a very biased Wildcat fan and I have been posting for the last two weeks that Nova still has potential for getting into the playoffs. I have met with nothing but caveman responses like "NADA!, ZERO! I'll betcha anything they don't get in!, JFC stupid! from the "friendly" Delaware fans on this forum. Even when I posted the Sporting News article outlining the new paramaters I got the same thing.

As you can see from the SRS Nova is very highly rated. My contention is they will need to beat Delaware this weekend and they will be considered. What say you?

JohnStOnge wrote:

LDopaPDX wrote:I don't know much about the SRS, but my understanding is that it is still in "trial mode." In other words, they are still tweaking it. Also, I believe the FCS playoff committee is planning on using this as the primary poll to decide inclusion to the playoffs, but not for 2013. Therefore, it is moot at this point. We're still stuck with the TSN poll, Sagarin, and the RPI.

First I've heard of them not using it this year. But either way the results look similar to the results of power ratings in general. My alma mater, McNeese State, is on the bubble for a top eight seed.

In any case I'm glad they're going to be using something like this in the future. You can see that it's got D-II teams mixed in there with the top 25 FCS teams so that a D-II is not automatically considered a "weak" opponent. Northwest Missouri State is "seen" as a tougher opponent than Arkansas Pine Bluff. And that's how it should be. Way more rational than the way they used to do things.

John, Sorry but I just don't get it. Using Northern Arizona for example. The team is 8-2. They lost to Montana State and the Univ. of Arizona (pac-12). Both were sizeable losses and as a result the SRS has them as the #38 team in the country. Compared to the SRS #8, Northern Iowa. Admittedly a good team, but none the less a 6-5 team which is essentially rewarded for having FIVE close losses rather than TWO lopsided ones.

I admire them attempting to come up with a system. Yet if this is it, as previously stated, I just don't get it.

John, Sorry but I just don't get it. Using Northern Arizona for example. The team is 8-2. They lost to Montana State and the Univ. of Arizona (pac-12). Both were sizeable losses and as a result the SRS has them as the #38 team in the country. Compared to the SRS #8, Northern Iowa. Admittedly a good team, but none the less a 6-5 team which is essentially rewarded for having FIVE close losses rather than TWO lopsided ones.

I admire them attempting to come up with a system. Yet if this is it, as previously stated, I just don't get it.

I'm guessing it's because, as you say, it considers margin of victory (or loss). Northern Iowa lost by one point to the top rated team then had three straight overtime losses. And it beat a highly rated team (McNeese) by 34 points. The system may even have given Northern Iowa more credit for losing to North Dakota State by one point, for example, than it gave NAU for beating Montana by 18 even though Montana is a highly rated team.

Another thing is that power ratings in general seem to be showing the Big Sky in general as down this year. Right now, for instance, that College Football Ranking Composite thing continues to have the Big Sky rated as 5th strongest conference behind the OVC. It also has Northern Iowa rated ahead of Northern Airzona; though the difference isn't nearly as great (19 vs. 22).

I said in another thread, BTW, that I would guess the SRS is probably not a good power rating system as power rating systems go just because the "powers that be" tend for some reason not to pick good power rating systems. I judge them by how well they predict game outcomes and I haven't been able to find anything on how well the SRS does in that regard.