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

Fcs footballs' niche was the playoffs. Now that the FBS has one..... are we done here? Every single person on this site has at one point or another said that the playoffs system is superior, so why watch fcs ball?

Right now it's just a 4-team playoff, which doesn't change a whole lot. If it becomes a 16-team field and mid-majors get auto-bids, then this might be an issue.

Mvemjsunpx wrote:Right now it's just a 4-team playoff, which doesn't change a whole lot. If it becomes a 16-team field and mid-majors get auto-bids, then this might be an issue.

I agree. What will happen to the majority of the bowls by then? That's another issue.

Not sure it becomes any more or less relevant....

BlackFalkin wrote:Fcs footballs' niche was the playoffs. Now that the FBS has one..... are we done here? Every single person on this site has at one point or another said that the playoffs system is superior, so why watch fcs ball?

Because I'm a fan of Eastern Washington University.

is D2 irrelevant?

D3?

I don't believe you can objectively compare FCS<--->FBS
It's 2 different animals ... the old 'Apples-Oranges' thang

Adding 'playoffs' to the FBS mix doesn't change that one way or the other, whether it's 4- or 16-team (which, they will never go there). I could see an odd-ball evolution of an expanded FBS playoff bracket with multiple byes and multiple play-in games to a 'Final Four' but nothing really beyond *6-8-10* teams.

the statement of "the playoff system makes FCS relevant" has always been BS.

Yes, the playoff system is superior to the bowl system (hence why all profesional leagues use a playoff system),
But the "typical" football fan has always considered FCS irrelevant, in much the same way that most people here consider D2 or D3 to be irrelevant.

I don't really know of anyone who was interested in FCS just b/c they have a playoff system. People become FCS fans b/c they have a connection to an FCS team (due to having attended an FCS school, or lived in a town w/ an FCS team, etc.)

I don't think it changes the relative "relevance" of the different levels. Wouldn't change it if what we now call FBS had a full blown playoff. I've always wished what we now call FBS did have that as it'd be fun to watch. I think the people interested in what we call FCS play would still be just as interested in it.

What Venus said.

This isn't a real playoff. It's just another excuse to marginalize the "have-nots." What we're going to see in most years under this system, regardless of actual play, is two SECs, a Big Ten, and a Pac-12, and NOBODY else. That's not a playoff. That's a power conference back-slapping-fest. It HAS to be a 16-team playoff, or it's not really a playoff. There HAS to be at least a CHANCE that a power conference team gets upset, or it's not a true playoff.

Cue RK's bogus heated rebuttal in 3...2...1....

SuperHornet wrote:What Venus said.

This isn't a real playoff. It's just another excuse to marginalize the "have-nots." What we're going to see in most years under this system, regardless of actual play, is two SECs, a Big Ten, and a Pac-12, and NOBODY else. That's not a playoff. That's a power conference back-slapping-fest. It HAS to be a 16-team playoff, or it's not really a playoff. There HAS to be at least a CHANCE that a power conference team gets upset, or it's not a true playoff.

Cue RK's bogus heated rebuttal in 3...2...1....

Agree with this post.

I agree with previous posts that expanding the FBS playoff makes FCS FB irrelevant. But, it's not like the NCAA or ESPN has been capitalizing on the fact that FCS has a playoff and been pushing it to the public mind...

Even if FBS expands to a 16 team playoff, FCS can still remain relevant by upsetting or giving close games to BCS programs. When a program like EWU can beat teams like Oregon State (and nearly knock off Washington) with such a tiny athletic budget, those are the Cinderella stories the public likes to hear and what make events the NCAA basketball tournament such a huge draw.

SuperHornet wrote:It HAS to be a 16-team playoff, or it's not really a playoff.

so the FCS only had a real playoff from 1986 through 2009?

JayJ79 wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:It HAS to be a 16-team playoff, or it's not really a playoff.

so the FCS only had a real playoff from 1986 through 2009?

Valid point, 79.

EDIT: It has to be a 16-team (or greater) playoff, or it's not really a playoff.

Powers of 4 work best, but having at least 16 (regardless of the exact number) DOES ensure that EVERYONE has a chance to work a miracle. I get sick of the "haves" trying to legislate the miracles out. It's stupid....

So won't FBS have to be FB/CS? Since a proper champion will be determined. It's a shame D1 fcs teams are treated like D2 but fcs conference basketball teams are thought of as D1. (Via the march madness tourney.) I think this is the only reason the term "FCS" and "1-AA" exist. And if that's true what's the future of Division 1 athletics and conferences?

Everyone here is fooling themselves if you don't think a FBS playoff makes the FCS playoffs even more irrelevant than it already is. We all love FCS mostly because the school/s we root for are a part of the system, maybe a few of us only because we don't like the bowl system and prefer the playoff system. But the fact that FBS has a new playoff system, even if it is kinda lame with only 4 teams, definitely makes FCS irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. And that's fine with me, I never had any grandiose thoughts about FCS versus FBS anyways.

AZGrizFan wrote:Not sure it becomes any more or less relevant....

+1

I dont really care, The FBS having a "playoff" system isnt going to stop me watching the FCS PLAYOFFS every year.

I am a Weber State fan first, a Big Sky fan second and an FCS fan 3rd and that's it for me.

Wildcat Ryan wrote:I dont really care, The FBS having a "playoff" system isnt going to stop me watching the FCS PLAYOFFS every year.

I am a Weber State fan first, a Big Sky fan second and an FCS fan 3rd and that's it for me.

Yep.

SuperHornet wrote: This isn't a real playoff. It's just another excuse to marginalize the "have-nots." What we're going to see in most years under this system, regardless of actual play, is two SECs, a Big Ten, and a Pac-12, and NOBODY else. That's not a playoff. That's a power conference back-slapping-fest. It HAS to be a 16-team playoff, or it's not really a playoff. There HAS to be at least a CHANCE that a power conference team gets upset, or it's not a true playoff.

It's not like FCS/I-AA has been all that different. There are still "haves" and "have-nots."

I'm sure you remember when 10-2 Liberty was left out of the playoffs.

Or a 10-1 Lehigh team.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

SuperHornet wrote: This isn't a real playoff. It's just another excuse to marginalize the "have-nots." What we're going to see in most years under this system, regardless of actual play, is two SECs, a Big Ten, and a Pac-12, and NOBODY else. That's not a playoff. That's a power conference back-slapping-fest. It HAS to be a 16-team playoff, or it's not really a playoff. There HAS to be at least a CHANCE that a power conference team gets upset, or it's not a true playoff.

It's not like FCS/I-AA has been all that different. There are still "haves" and "have-nots."

I'm sure you remember when 10-2 Liberty was left out of the playoffs.

Or a 10-1 Lehigh team.

I don't remember a 10-1 Lehigh getting snubbed, though I certainly remember Liberty getting snubbed EVERY FREAKING YEAR.

That said, the most obvious one was the year Cow Poly went undefeated and was denied....

SuperHornet wrote:I certainly remember Liberty getting snubbed EVERY FREAKING YEAR.

That said, the most obvious one was the year Cow Poly went undefeated and was denied....

Exactly.

So, FCS is also divided between the "haves" and "have-nots."

Granted, the larger playoff pool certainly helps.

But, I think it's inevitable that the FBS playoff slowly expands.

I certainly like the FCS postseason better, even with the playoffs, but FBS is moving in the right direction.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:I certainly remember Liberty getting snubbed EVERY FREAKING YEAR.

That said, the most obvious one was the year Cow Poly went undefeated and was denied....

Exactly.

So, FCS is also divided between the "haves" and "have-nots."

Granted, the larger playoff pool certainly helps.

But, I think it's inevitable that the FBS playoff slowly expands.

I certainly like the FCS postseason better, even with the playoffs, but FBS is moving in the right direction.

There are maybe one or two teams in the history of the playoffs that really got screwed by the selection committee. I assume the "12-0 Cal Poly" you remember so well was the 1997 10-1 team? You know, the one that had wins over Simon Frasier, Montana-Western, Western New Mexico, St Mary's... yeah, screwed.

No less relevant than the Sun Belt

All the 'Beeg Boyz' in FBS have conference championship games (and 12- or 13-game regular seasons) -- no way should the losers be eligible to game in a national championship playoff.

At best, that's 6-8 teams left standing in December eligible for the 'bracket'