New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Football Championship Subdivision discussions
User avatar
93henfan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 56358
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:03 pm
Location: Slower Delaware

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by 93henfan »

SeattleGriz wrote:
93henfan wrote:
UND? The team that lost to Idaho State? Image

Again, arguing over teams that weak... who cares really? None will make the quarters.
You fucked UND. Someone did! Isn't that our go to phrase this year?
Is UND hot? I will fuck it!!
Delaware Football: 1889-2012; 2022-
User avatar
93henfan
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 56358
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:03 pm
Location: Slower Delaware

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by 93henfan »

Clown football!!!
Delaware Football: 1889-2012; 2022-
User avatar
Chizzang
Level5
Level5
Posts: 19274
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:36 am
I am a fan of: Deflate Gate
A.K.A.: The Quasar Kid
Location: Palermo Italy

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by Chizzang »

93henfan wrote:UNH blows. I don't think anybody disputed that, did they? I mean, they were smoked by Stony Brook and Delaware.

All this really showed is how watered down FCS is and how the field is way too large.

16 is where it should still be. Arguing over the 22nd, 23rd, 24th teams in FCS is silly. None of those teams belong in a playoff anyway.
I completely agree ^ with this...
When you're asking yourself "Which one of these mediocre teams sucks the least"
You've got too many teams


:nod:
Q: Name something that offends Republicans?
A: The actual teachings of Jesus
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 66950
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by kalm »

Chizzang wrote:
93henfan wrote:UNH blows. I don't think anybody disputed that, did they? I mean, they were smoked by Stony Brook and Delaware.

All this really showed is how watered down FCS is and how the field is way too large.

16 is where it should still be. Arguing over the 22nd, 23rd, 24th teams in FCS is silly. None of those teams belong in a playoff anyway.
I completely agree ^ with this...
When you're asking yourself "Which one of these mediocre teams sucks the least"
You've got too many teams


:nod:
Sure! If you like LESS football. :coffee:

Why I was just sitting here today thinking "if I only had less football to watch".

Maybe if we didn't water down the field, the product would be better and they'd take us more seriously! :lol:

The more the merrier. The more inter-conference match ups the better.

A chance for upsets? Better.

The greater chance my team gets in for at least one more game and possibly a home game?

Better. :nod:

The watered down/too many teams sentiment is for stick-in-the-muds.

:nod:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
89Hen
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 39257
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:13 pm
I am a fan of: High Horses
A.K.A.: The Almighty Arbiter

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by 89Hen »

93henfan wrote:All this really showed is how watered down FCS is and how the field is way too large.
:nod: :nod: :nod:
Image
User avatar
89Hen
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 39257
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:13 pm
I am a fan of: High Horses
A.K.A.: The Almighty Arbiter

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by 89Hen »

kalm wrote:The watered down/too many teams sentiment is for stick-in-the-muds.

:nod:
The let everyone in sentiment is for people who like participation medals. 8-)
Image
User avatar
Grizalltheway
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 35688
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:01 pm
A.K.A.: DJ Honey BBQ
Location: BSC

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by Grizalltheway »

89Hen wrote:
kalm wrote:The watered down/too many teams sentiment is for stick-in-the-muds.

:nod:
The let everyone in sentiment is for people who like participation medals. 8-)
24 out of 120-some teams is "everyone"?
User avatar
89Hen
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 39257
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:13 pm
I am a fan of: High Horses
A.K.A.: The Almighty Arbiter

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by 89Hen »

Grizalltheway wrote:
89Hen wrote: The let everyone in sentiment is for people who like participation medals. 8-)
24 out of 120-some teams is "everyone"?
When you're searching for mediocre teams, yes.
Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 66950
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by kalm »

89Hen wrote:
kalm wrote:The watered down/too many teams sentiment is for stick-in-the-muds.

:nod:
The let everyone in sentiment is for people who like participation medals. 8-)
The too many teams sentiment is for every other year (or 5 straight) under .500 CAA clubs. :kisswink:

'Whoa! Those tits are just way too big and that's WAY too much football!'

'
Image
Image
Image
YoUDeeMan
Level5
Level5
Posts: 12088
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:48 am
I am a fan of: Fleecing the Stupid
A.K.A.: Delaware Homie

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by YoUDeeMan »

New Hampshire stunk. North Dakota stunk. Western Illinois stunk.

None of them belongs in a serious playoff discussion.

JMU is simply a Big Sky team in CAA clothing. Ditto Richmond.

W&M has an idiot coach who doesn't make defensive adjustments.

JState has a team this year :nod: ...but we'll see if they have learned how to win.

The South Carolina teams all have had glaring weaknesses. McNeese doesn't have an offense capable of winning it all. SHSU can score with anyone if it isn't raining (pssst...espandos...the chemtrails are actually laced with J. Johnson kryptonite), but their DC (the original one who is still calling things..we'll see how long he lasts) doesn't know how to use the talent he has.

We're really stuck with UNI, Ill St., and JState...with NDSU and SHSU as dark horses.

The rest of the teams don't have a chance.
These signatures have a 500 character limit?

What if I have more personalities than that?
User avatar
89Hen
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 39257
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:13 pm
I am a fan of: High Horses
A.K.A.: The Almighty Arbiter

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by 89Hen »

kalm wrote:'Whoa! Those tits are just way too big and that's WAY too much football!'
So you'd be OK with 120 teams in the field. Gotcha.
Image
User avatar
89Hen
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 39257
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 1:13 pm
I am a fan of: High Horses
A.K.A.: The Almighty Arbiter

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by 89Hen »

kalm wrote:'Whoa! Those tits are just way too big
BTW, that too can be a true statement. :nod:
Image
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 66950
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by kalm »

89Hen wrote:
kalm wrote:'Whoa! Those tits are just way too big and that's WAY too much football!'
So you'd be OK with 120 teams in the field. Gotcha.
:lol:
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
BDKJMU
Level5
Level5
Posts: 34582
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 6:59 am
I am a fan of: JMU
A.K.A.: BDKJMU
Location: Philly Burbs

Re: New Hampshire selection doesn't add up

Post by BDKJMU »

Grizalltheway wrote:
89Hen wrote: The let everyone in sentiment is for people who like participation medals. 8-)
24 out of 120-some teams is "everyone"?
More like 24 of 90ish as 3 conferences don't participate..

To top it off, 60 some are full scholly, as only 7 of those 10 AQ conferences are fully scholly. This season those 60 some teams got 20 spots. Last season it was 21, as it will be most seasons..
Image
JMU Football: 2022 & 2023 Sun Belt East Champions
Post Reply