Quality Losses

[DMoo531]

I am confused how SHSU and was selected over Lehigh, UR or NAU to the playoffs. They very well could show us they are the best of the 20, but the resume they brought to the committee does not show it. The committee speaks of “quality wins”. Where are SHSU's? Granted they blew away most of the SLC. But I don't see a quality win in that bunch. The only competition was Central Arkansas-SHSU lost. I realize Incarnate will soon be joining the other powerhouses in the SLC, so I give credit to SHSU in scheduling them early. Add to that a creampuff like Texas Southern. Sorry, there is not a “quality win” in that mix.
The only thing SHSU has on it's resume is “did well last year”, “close to Frisco” and 2 FBS losses. If SHSU had been close against either Tx A&M or Baylor I would call them “quality losses”. But SHSU lost each by 3 TD's. They weren't close in either game.
So I ask you, what is on SHSU's resume that warrants an invite over UR(8 Div I wins),NAU(7, with a FBS win), Lehigh(10),Albany(9),or even Tenn.St(8)?
The only other 7 winner selected at-large was Wofford. At least Wofford can show it played in the difficult SoCon. How Wofford got the invite over UR or NAU is beyond me.
Towson scheduled 2 FBS games, and is paying the price by staying home. SHSU goes one step further and adds a Div II to 2 can't-win FBS games, but is forgiven. I don't see why.
It's like the committee put a quota on each conference & then made their selection. BSC, CAA & SoCon were granted 3, so NAU & UR stay home but Wofford gets in. SLC gets 2 so SHSU gets in.
It is the arbitrary selection process that is the problem. Not so much who gets in, but who is forced out. I've an easy solution. 32 team field. There will still be arguments by those who don't make it, but at least they will not be 10-1 teams. Plus we'll have some action starting the first weekend. Not like this year where we mostly sit on our thumbs waiting another week for our team to play.

[Mvemjsunpx]

McNeese wasn't a quality win? The Cowboys went 7-4 with a win over a halfway decent FBS team, and the Bearkats beat McNeese by 35.

[kalm]

McNeese wasn't a quality win? The Cowboys went 7-4 with a win over a halfway decent FBS team, and the Bearkats beat McNeese by 35.

This, but I think that gets them not quite equal with NAU and UR which are both from better conferences. I would guess it also had to do with a 7 game FCS winning streak to close the season before the A&M loss and the fact that they were blowing out everyone. They also only played 3 homes games. The latter too aren't supposed to matter much but they had to be difficult facts to ignore.

[htownbearkat]

The exact same arguments were made last year when the bearkats got the #1 seed. no quality wins, weak southland, and so on. By the time they got to Frisco they had at least 3 quality wins and the committee got it right.
This team has 18 returning starters and after a slow start are peaking. These are all factors fair or not.

[kalm]

The exact same arguments were made last year when the bearkats got the #1 seed. no quality wins, weak southland, and so on. By the time they got to Frisco they had at least 3 quality wins and the committee got it right.
This team has 18 returning starters and after a slow start are peaking. These are all factors fair or not.

Last year...another factor that's not supposed to be weighed but probably is.

[89Hen]

I am confused how SHSU and was selected...

Seriously, you're still on this? SHSU was 8-3, was runner-up last year and brought a bunch of fans to Frisco. This isn't rocket science. You need to let this go.

[kalm]

I am confused how SHSU and was selected...

Seriously, you're still on this? SHSU was 8-3, was runner-up last year and brought a bunch of fans to Frisco. This isn't rocket science. You need to let this go.

Montana would bring more fans.

[89Hen]

Seriously, you're still on this? SHSU was 8-3, was runner-up last year and brought a bunch of fans to Frisco. This isn't rocket science. You need to let this go.

Montana would bring more fans.

They're not 8-3. If they were, they'd be in.

[89Hen]

Last year...another factor that's not supposed to be weighed...

Where does it say that in the guidelines?

[bluehenbillk]

The Southland is a power conference, the Patriot is not. Next question.

[kalm]

Montana would bring more fans.

They're not 8-3. If they were, they'd be in.

So consideration of last year and potential ticket sales to Frisco are in the guidelines?

[kalm]

The Southland is a power conference, the Patriot is not. Next question.

I think the Southland and OVC are power conferences "lite".

[89Hen]

I think the Southland and OVC are power conferences "lite".

Not sure how you can tie the two together. The Southland has had two runners-up and two semi-finalists in the last 10 years and won a couple other games. The OVC hasn't won a playoff game this century (I think last was Murray in 1996).

[89Hen]

They're not 8-3. If they were, they'd be in.

So consideration of last year and potential ticket sales to Frisco are in the guidelines?

The guidelines are fairly vague for a reason and the Committee has a LOT of leeway in selections. Do you think an 8-3 Montana, Delaware, UNI, etc... gets left out?

[Gil Dobie]

I am confused how SHSU and was selected...

Seriously, you're still on this? SHSU was 8-3, was runner-up last year and brought a bunch of fans to Frisco. This isn't rocket science. You need to let this go.

Did anyone not in the playoffs have a better record in FCS other than Lehigh, than SAM at 7-1?

[kalm]

So consideration of last year and potential ticket sales to Frisco are in the guidelines?

The guidelines are fairly vague for a reason and the Committee has a LOT of leeway in selections. Do you think an 8-3 Montana, Delaware, UNI, etc... gets left out?

1) I know

2) Probably they not, but they should if there are 20 teams with better resumes.

You're arguing the reality and have obviously forgotten that you're speaking to an "egalitarian".

[UNI88]

The guidelines are fairly vague for a reason and the Committee has a LOT of leeway in selections. Do you think an 8-3 Montana, Delaware, UNI, etc... gets left out?

1) I know

2) Probably they not, but they should if there are 20 teams with better resumes.

You're arguing the reality and have obviously forgotten that you're speaking to an "egalitarian".

The FCS playoffs are not the financial windfall that the bowls are so while money may not be an explicit consideration it is most likely a consideration. It may not be fair or egalitarian but if it helps to keep the playoffs viable, I'm ok with it as a necessary evil. I'd rather have a playoffs where a team's fanbase and financial support give them an edge in a tie-breaker than not have playoffs at all.

[SuperHornet]

The bowls are a "financial windfall"?!? Have you ever seen the list of schools that have gone into debt to fund a bowl trip?

There is travel suite is MUCH larger than for your typical road game, there is the ticket guarantee, which usually is a huge problem: you can't sell all the tickets, so the SCHOOL has to pay out of its own pocket for the privilege of giving them back to the bowl committee for walkup sales.

I'll take the playoffs any day of the week. While I'd prefer to see a 32 team playoff, even the 16 team playoff most around here are clammoring for is better than having a string of bowl deficits in the ledger....

[UNI88]

The bowls are a "financial windfall"?!? Have you ever seen the list of schools that have gone into debt to fund a bowl trip?

There is travel suite is MUCH larger than for your typical road game, there is the ticket guarantee, which usually is a huge problem: you can't sell all the tickets, so the SCHOOL has to pay out of its own pocket for the privilege of giving them back to the bowl committee for walkup sales.

I'll take the playoffs any day of the week. While I'd prefer to see a 32 team playoff, even the 16 team playoff most around here are clammoring for is better than having a string of bowl deficits in the ledger....

Who was talking only about the schools? Lots of entities profit from the bowls and as a whole they are a financial windfall. The playoffs aren't. I'm not criticizing the playoffs but they are what they are and it would be naive to pretend otherwise.

[SuperHornet]

That's the point, 88. Place the words "financial windfall" in connection to collegiate sports, and the average fan is going to think that the SCHOOLs are raking in the dough. They're not. The PROMOTERS are, and it's breaking the backs of the average school. Sure, it doesn't always happen to the top dogs going to the top tier bowls, but I seem to remember something about Ohio State paying through the nose one year to go to a bowl. Just think how bad it can be for a Sun Belt school to go.

The promoters are getting rich off the backs of the schools. With the playoffs at least the schools get SOMETHING out of a boost to the local economy, even if the NCAA rips them off at the gate....

[JohnStOnge]

I will just mention that McNeese State did beat Middle Tennessee State to open the season. That is a team that beat Georgia Tech...which may not be THAT great this year but still very good for a Sun Belt team...and has a shot to win the Sun Belt and finish the season at 9-3. McNeese State had 4 losses. Three of them were by a total of 9 points. One was really bad as it was to Southeastern Louisiana by 1.

But they also lost to Central Arkansas by 1 in a game that was a miracle win for the Bears. McNeese scored with a little over 3 minutes left to go up 26-17. Central Arkansas had to convert a 4th and 10...barely...to keep a TD drive alive and draw within 26-24. Then they had to recover an onside kick which took a miracle bounce over the entire McNeese hands team, hit near the sideline, then bounced at something close to a right angle to stay in bounds so that it was recovered at the McNeese 38. Central Arkansas kicked a 47 yard field goal to win the game by 1 (McNeese missed an extra point earlier to leave the door open for that).

Sam Houston State beat McNeese State 45-10. I personally think that the emotionally crushing fluke loss by McNeese to Central Arkansas the week earlier was a factor. But, still, that was the only game McNeese State was in all year where it was just totally outplayed and had no chance to win.

Anyway, McNeese State was 4 points from being in the playoffs instead of Central Arkansas by virtue of a 1 point loss to the Bears and a 1 point loss to Southeastern Louisiana. Pretty much Sam Houston State beat a team comparable in caliber to Central Arkansas when it beat McNeese State. Ball just didn't bounce their way this year. Literally.

[htownbearkat]

I will just mention that McNeese State did beat Middle Tennessee State to open the season. That is a team that beat Georgia Tech...which may not be THAT great this year but still very good for a Sun Belt team...and has a shot to win the Sun Belt and finish the season at 9-3. McNeese State had 4 losses. Three of them were by a total of 9 points. One was really bad as it was to Southeastern Louisiana by 1.

But they also lost to Central Arkansas by 1 in a game that was a miracle win for the Bears. McNeese scored with a little over 3 minutes left to go up 26-17. Central Arkansas had to convert a 4th and 10...barely...to keep a TD drive alive and draw within 26-24. Then they had to recover an onside kick which took a miracle bounce over the entire McNeese hands team, hit near the sideline, then bounced at something close to a right angle to stay in bounds so that it was recovered at the McNeese 38. Central Arkansas kicked a 47 yard field goal to win the game by 1 (McNeese missed an extra point earlier to leave the door open for that).

Sam Houston State beat McNeese State 45-10. I personally think that the emotionally crushing fluke loss by McNeese to Central Arkansas the week earlier was a factor. But, still, that was the only game McNeese State was in all year where it was just totally outplayed and had no chance to win.

Anyway, McNeese State was 4 points from being in the playoffs instead of Central Arkansas by virtue of a 1 point loss to the Bears and a 1 point loss to Southeastern Louisiana. Pretty much Sam Houston State beat a team comparable in caliber to Central Arkansas when it beat McNeese State. Ball just didn't bounce their way this year. Literally.

But then the pokes would of been beat by stoney brook in NY in the play in game and it would not of been close. I like how you explain closes win and losses. funny how much they differ when apologizing for your teams closes losses vs SHSUs close wins.

[JohnStOnge]

But then the pokes would of been beat by stoney brook in NY in the play in game and it would not of been close. I like how you explain closes win and losses. funny how much they differ when apologizing for your teams closes losses vs SHSUs close wins.

You know, in this case I'm trying to argue that Sam Houston has a quality win in blowing out McNeese State. I look at both close wins and close losses. If you beat a team 50-0 that's different information than beating that team by one point. And if you lose to a team by one point that's different information than losing to a team by 50 points.

Sam Houston State was the best team in the Southland Conference this year even if it didn't get the automatic bid. It did not dominate the conference to the same extent as it it did last year in that last year the BearKats were not challenged at all. Did not even have a close game. This year they had a conference loss to UCA and had a very competitive game with SFA that I think (after watching it on TV) could've gone either way.

McNeese State was 4 points from tying for the conference championship, finishing 9-2, and going to the playoffs. The difference between that and what we McNeese fans have to live with is giving up a 1st down on a 4th and 11 situation to Southeastern Louisiana on a fake punt then giving up a two point conversion at the end of the game and UCA coverting a 4th and 10, successfully recovering an onside kick, then kicking a 47 yard field goal. The margin between a very successful season and a very disappointing one was very thin. McNeese State was obviously capable of beating both those teams and, as I said, is probably about equivalent in caliber to UCA. Had they had those two 1 point games go their way I don't think they'd be in a play in game. They'd probably be in about the same spot as UCA is.

The margin between Sam Houston State making the playoffs and not making it was fairly thin too because the fact that they scheduled two games against BCS league teams meant they couldn't afford more than one conference loss. You and I both know they could very well have lost that game against SFA. If a fan didn't know the recent history and didn't know Sam Houston State came in highly favored he'd have thought he was watching two very evenly matched teams play. Credit to Sam Houston State for making the plays and winning the game. But that game was competitive enough so that one play could've made the difference in who won and who lost.

BTW the margin between being in the playoffs and being 7-4 sitting them out was very thin for UCA too. EXTREMELY thin as they had two narrow last minute wins over Sam Houston State and McNeese State. Both games in which one play could've made a difference in the outcome. And the one at McNeese State really was a miracle.

Sam Houston State obviously belongs in the playoffs and has a shot. I don't think they're as good as you think they are but that's to be expected.

[JohnStOnge]

Now I'll get to what I came here this time to post. The assertion seems to be that Sam Houston State didn't have any quality wins while Northern Arizona and Richmond apparently did. I forgot about Richmond so I'll make another post after this. But below are some power ratings for McNeese State and the teams Northern Arizona beat. I'll indicate Sagarin (Sag), Massey (Mas), and the average of ratings at http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (Av). There are some blanks (---) because Sagarin only does Division I and the ranking comparison only includes FCS. Here we go:

McNeese State Sag 111, Mas 128, Av 27
UNLV Sag 138, Mas 153, Av ---
Fort Lewis Sag ---, Mas 598, Av ---
Montana Sag 154, Mas 156, Av 42
Portland State Sag 161, Mas 177, Av 57
North Dakota Sag 144, Mas 145, Av 44
UC Davis Sag 159, Mas 165, Av 48
Northern Colorado Sag 165, Mas 162, Av 51
Idaho State Sag 222, Mas 307, Av 113

So it appears that power ratings pretty much "agree" that McNeese State was better than anybody NAU beat. And Sam Houston State beat the Cowboys by 45-10.

[JohnStOnge]

Ok Richmond does better because the majority of power rating systems regard Villanova higher than McNeese State. Not as uniformly as they regard McNeese State higher than anybody Northern Arizona beat but definitely the majority. See my last post for an explanation of the below. McNeese State listed first then the teams Richmond beat:

McNeese State Sag 111, Mas 128, Av 27
Gardner Webb Sag 228, Mas 324, Av 101
VMI Sag 238, Mas 374, Av 114
Georgia State Sag 223, Mas 313, Av 108
Villanova Sag 125, Mas 112, Av 13
JMU Sag 147, Mas 149, Av 28
Rhode Island Sag 239, Mas 389, Av 115
Delaware Sag 180, Mas 186, Av 50
William & Mary Sag 184, Mas 212, Av 67

You could also say that JMU is very close to McNeese in the average ratings. So it does look like Richmond has a small edge in who they beat. Also Richmond lost to two playoff teams and one BCS league team as compared to Sam Houston State losing to one playoff team and two BCS league teams.

All in all I think there's a lot better argument for Richmond being in over Sam Houston State than there is for Northern Arizona. But it's still not like shockingly unreasonable to have Sam Houston State in over the other two.