Playoff field

[zooropa]

Re: Playoff field

Shouldn't the record of the teams being compared be subtracted out of the records displayed? Or have you already done that?

e.g. subtract 8 losses from SDSU's opponents, as well as 3 wins, to remove SDSU from the result set?

Otherwise, I believe you artificially skew the 'losses' of a team with a better record.

Montana would be 51 - 59, SDSU would be 62-60; SIU 51-59, etc.

[rabbits64]

Re: Playoff field

Shouldn't the record of the teams being compared be subtracted out of the records displayed? Or have you already done that?

e.g. subtract 8 losses from SDSU's opponents, as well as 3 wins, to remove SDSU from the result set?

Otherwise, I believe you artificially skew the 'losses' of a team with a better record.

Montana would be 51 - 59, SDSU would be 62-60; SIU 51-59, etc.

I did not take them out, thanks for the assist.

[thumper_76]

Re: Playoff field

Unfortunately from what I recall it was pretty light buyout.

Which would be our fault for making it light enough to buy out. Good lord people let it go. It was one game when we were transitioning. Sound like a bunch of freakin NDSU fans.

[JACKGUYII]

Re: Playoff field

Which would be our fault for making it light enough to buy out. Good lord people let it go. It was one game when we were transitioning. Sound like a bunch of freakin NDSU fans.

It's called integrity and the Montana Athletic Dept has demonstrated repeatedly they don't have any of it. If that is not important to you so be it, but to say it was our fault is laughable.

[mango4]

Re: Playoff field

It's called integrity and the Montana Athletic Dept has demonstrated repeatedly they don't have any of it. If that is not important to you so be it, but to say it was our fault is laughable.

I was upset about it too but remember we were the ones that agreed to a 2-for-1 with the game at CAS being the last game. We could have tried to get the middle game at CAS

[NorCalJack]

Re: Playoff field

I see the Griz has lost in the first round of the playoffs in 2003, 2005 & 2007. I see a trend and a loss in 2009!!!

Go Jacks!!!

[BTownJack]

Re: Playoff field

Article about SDSU making the playoffs from today's Argus:

Jacks open playoffs at Montana
SDSU face top-seed in first FCS postseason appearance
Terry Vandrovec - November 23, 2009

BROOKINGS - It took 30 years and a change of divisions to make it happen, but the South Dakota State football program is back in the postseason.

On Sunday, the No. 11-ranked Jackrabbits (8-3) were awarded one of eight at-large bids to the 16-team Football Championship Subdivision playoffs. They also learned, through a nationally televised selection show, that they will have to take on top-seeded Montana (11-0) in the first round at 1 p.m. Saturday.

But the tough task was - for a moment - secondary. While the team didn't hoot or holler or dump sports drinks after all but clinching the berth with a win at Western Illinois on Saturday, it let out a collective cheer when its draw popped up on the screen.

Few saw this coming. SDSU moved to the NCAA Division I level only in 2004, didn't become playoff eligible until last year, and had only one postseason appearance in its first 111 seasons.

"It's a very unique experience," said Jacks senior receiver Mike Steffen, one of 19 South Dakotans on the roster. "It's something you dream about as a little kid, an opportunity to play for a national championship, an opportunity to be on a big stage. This is why I came here - for an opportunity to do something that's never been done."
Last year, SDSU came up one win short of playoff consideration. This season, the Jacks bolted out to a 7-1 start - their best mark since 1963 - and picked up an all-important eighth win Saturday after losing to No. 4-seeded Southern Illinois and bowl-eligible Minnesota in consecutive weeks. They finished second in the Missouri Valley Football Conference, a two-bid league since 1995, by two full games.

SDSU wound up making the field fairly easily because of a rash of upsets on the final day of the regular season. That even raised hopes of possibly hosting in the first round - the administration put in a bid to do so and the team is averaging 13,265 fans per home game, fifth highest among the 16 qualifiers.

(read more)

[KUlawJack]

Re: Playoff field

Which would be our fault for making it light enough to buy out. Good lord people let it go. It was one game when we were transitioning. Sound like a bunch of freakin NDSU fans.

The bolded. Please God, the bolded. The Montana AD/Athletic Dept. did not personally slight a single one of us. EQ hit the nail on the head earlier. How they run their athletic department has nothing to do with us and the constant vitriol reflects just as poorly on us as fans as any slight Montana may have inflicted upon our athletic department in the past. Our team gets a chance to earn it this weekend and that is all that matters.

[darkerstill]

Re: Playoff field

The bolded. Please God, the bolded. The Montana AD/Athletic Dept. did not personally slight a single one of us. EQ hit the nail on the head earlier. How they run their athletic department has nothing to do with us and the constant vitriol reflects just as poorly on us as fans as any slight Montana may have inflicted upon our athletic department in the past. Our team gets a chance to earn it this weekend and that is all that matters.

Amen...turn the page.

[GrizMonster]

Re: Playoff field

I will admit, I don't follow the BSC at all during the year. Looking at their conference, I don't understand why they got 3 teams in the playoffs. My guess is more their reputation than substance (Weber also lost 2 close games to FBS teams Wyoming and Colorado State).
I know the MVC was weak at the bottom end, but I think the top 6 in the MVC is much better.

Just some random data, make your own conclusions:

Opponents
W L
Montanta 51 70
SDSU 65 67
EWU 59 64
Weber 54 67
SIU 52 69

UNI 58 63

Overall combined records
Big Sky Conf 49 50
MVC 48 51

BSC had 4 teams with winning records
MVC had 6 teams with winning records

I think probably they took Weber over UNI due to how recent UNI's losses were, and the committee probably viewed Weber's win over EWU as a better win than UNI's best win...Which was MSU I believe.

[EverettGriz]

Re: Playoff field

Somebody riddle me this: How did Montana get the number one seed when SIU is number one in all of the polls?

First, SIU was not number one in all of the polls. The Griz have been number one in the Coach's Poll for the past 3 or 4 weeks.

Second, polls have little to do with seeding. Seeding is done by the Committee, and a number of factors play into their decisions. I would say polls rank about 432nd on that list of factors.

Third, please explain why Montana shouldn't be the number one seed? They are undefeated, and they are the returning/defending National Finalist. In the FCS, champions are decided on the FIELD. Had Richmond not lost, they should have been number one. Why? Because they've proved it on the field. Montana is the same. They played in the title game last year and are undefeated this year. There could be NO other choice for the number one seed. If you believe someone else should be number one, I suggest you watch FBS football where they let computers decide a national champion. Personally, I prefer a system that names a champions based upon what happens on the field of play.

[bub94]

Re: Playoff field

read reason for editing

[EverettGriz]

Re: Playoff field

I guess the seeding should be made on how they did this year and not last year. I could care less what they did last year or the year before. That would be like saying the league MVP last year should win it again since he is the returning MVP. And my statement is not meant to be snotty, just making a calm statement.

Dude, Montana is undefeated THIS year. They played in the national title game last year, and haven't been beaten this year. Ever hear the phrase, "Until proven otherwise...."?

Again, my opinion is that if you don't seed an undefeated finalist number one, we should just let the computers and the pollsters from AGS and the TSN determine the national champion. Why even play the games?

[Theee Catrabbit]

Re: Playoff field

regardless of Seed, SDSU was going to play Montana, unless UNI would have figured a way to squeak in. 11-0 is still 11-0. Regardless it all is shot into a playoff system. So either Montana wins out or doesn't...that's the beauty of the playoff system. Seeded or not if you run the table you are the National Champ and there aren't any arguments or voting to change it any other way. Now past the 1st 4, there isn't a whole lot of "fair" as some people would like to hear. It is a bidding process, geography and a dart thrown at the map. There is no one on either side that probably thinks it's "fair" that they are playing each other. SDSU is not the 16th best team in the field and should probably be playing an unseeded team for sure, and I think the level headed U of M fans probably think the same.
Now it really doesn't matter if you think you have the Championship Team: If you are the Championship team you would eventually have to beat the other one to be Champion anyways. There is no easy road in winning a National Title! Otherwise everybody would get a ribbon at the end of the season!
Sit back and enjoy the ride no matter how long it lasts! Go Big! Go Blue! Go Jacks!

[EverettGriz]

Re: Playoff field

I completely agree. There are a number of teams I would have prefered to have seen sent to Missoula as opposed to SDSU. But, you gotta beat everyone at some point. Might as well start in round one.