The Play-off Selections

(4 or not?)

     For those of you that have been readers of Pete’s since last year … you might recall that we posted an article with reasons why any one conference should not be allowed to hold four selections to the 2002 play-off. In addition, we thought that the committee should look at 3, only in the most "rare" of circumstances. I further went on to state that the want, or "perceived need" for 4 clubs would not be a one-time only situation. Well … here we are … only one year later … and it is happening again.

     Last year, we had the SoCon, with parity. In their own minds, were not willing to leave out a fellow member of the "Big-3" and instead … left out Wofford. The truth was, as the 1^st-round SoCon exoduses proved … that parity does not mean superiority. In order to not upset any members of the "big-3" … we had to see Wofford sit home while their conference counterparts fell early. Well in 2003, we have a slightly different scenario. We have 4 teams of decent parity … all with exemplified superiority … and all from the same conference … the GFC.

     The Gateway Football Conference has long been a quality conference, but none so more than in the last few years. Traditionally, a single (occasionally two-deep) conference … the GFC admitted YSU in 1997. In their first year in the conference … YSU won a national title. People were finally in agreement that the conference was good enough for a consistent second bid. YSU & ILS went to the post-season in 1999 … and both made the semis … Redbirds fell, while YSU fell in the final. Since the admission of YSU … the GFC has always had 3 solid teams at the top. Now, the conference admitted WKU last season … and they proceed to win the national title in their first year in the Gateway. But still … no 3^rd bid. What is a conference to do? Well, use logic … if you think you deserve 2, ask for 3 … if you think you deserve 3 … ask for 4. Now, with all this seeming praise for the Gateway ... we seem to be "changing our tune" about a fourth selection. The response to this is "NO" ... not in the least bit.

     I will agree that the GFC is probably the only conference in the nation that has a right to a third bid (something it has never seen) ... but no conference (in our minds) deserves 4 bids. It is simply not fair, nor a wise move by a national organization. After all ... it is the NCAA {NATIONAL Collegiate Athletics Association}. Allow me to explain:

The NCAA, Division I-AA divides the country into 4 regions ... fairly equal in number of teams and conferences, despite obvious size differences. The regions are East, Central, South and West. For a full breakdown of the states ... see our I-AA page at http://www.petespoll.com/iaahistory.html. One very important note, is that the West region is as large as the other three regions combined. Why? The obvious answer is ... to be fair and competitive in the representation of teams. Each region has two "power" conferences. We define those "power" conferences as those that receive an automatic bid to the play-off:

-West = Big Sky Conference and Southland Conference.
-Central = Gateway Football Conference and Ohio Valley Conference.
-South = Southern Conference and Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference.
-East = Atlantic-10 Conference and the Patriot League.

In an ideal season ... the NCAA would chose the winner of each "power" conference, making 8 selections ... and the 8 second-place teams ... making a total of 16 teams. The idea of "seeding" and"bracketing" resulted from the need to make ... ? Yes ... the meetings more fair and competitive. mmmm ... seems to be a pattern of fairness and competitiveness developing. Maybe this will help:

Now, we do not have ideal circumstances each and every year. It has now become quite common for the selection committee to offer more, or less, bids to a given conference. For example, the Patriot League has traditionally been a less competitive conference than many others (no insult intended and in 2003 ... we feel this in NOT the case). So, let's look at what has been done in the past ... that is, award 3 bids to the A-10 and only a single bid to the PL. In addition, let us also look at another common occurrence ... the SoCon picking up a third bid from the MEAC ... which has been a bit weaker than the SoCon in years past (again, we feel this is not the case in 2003):

*Please note ... that although the conference bid figures have changed ... the overall regional bids remain the same at 4.

Now, let us look at the result of the selection of four (4) teams from the same conference. Keep in mind that the NCAA has awarded guaranteed bids to the "power" conferences; again ... to remain fair and competitive. Let us say that the NCAA decides to award 4 selections to the GFC:

Now you can see where the problems will begin. The selection of 4 teams from the GFC has increased the number of REGIONAL BIDS to 5, while the overall number of bids will still be 16. The reason for doing this would be to help the play-off become more competitive ... but at the expense of all Fairness. It simply destroys the territorial boundaries of the NCAA, as the additional bid (as the OVC has a guaranteed bid, making 5 from the Central Region) must come from ANOTHER region. So what can we do and what will result?:

1. We can allow 4 bids to the GFC, making 5 to a single region. Okay, so a few years go bye and the OVC is once again a power. We have EIU, EKU, SeMS and JSU all with 3 losses or less. Also, YSU returns to favor and the GFC has 4 teams doing well. Do we just award 8 bids to the region? Do you think a 9-2 Villanova or a 9-3 Furman is going to be denied? I don't think so. The conference will just do as the SWAC has done (quite successfully I might add) ... split and have a conference championship.

2. Think about this. As quality of performance tends to run a course of 2-4 years (enough time for a class to graduate), the NCAA may be forced to award 4 bids to a given conference and 5 to a region. So how many graduating prep players that are from the Missouri Valley, Ohio Valley, or Mahoning Valley are going to refuse to play for OVC clubs ... in favor of the GFC? More than you think if they know that the conference is only going to receive a single bid ... when they have 4 chances in the GFC. Simply stated, there is a 50% chance if they join a GFC club, while only an 11% chance if they join an OVC team. They will end up jumping to another conference/region all together if they cannot join one of these 4 teams in the GFC. How is that fair?

3. Let us look at the main goal with the NCAA I-AA administration. That is to promote the division, it's future popularity and eventual growth. Well, let's take our "time machine" a few years to the future once again. Suddenly we have a competitive Big South and a new conference growing out West (it is almost here now). If these conferences cannot have some type of guarantee to the post-season ... they will NEVER grow and never receive any quality recruits, as they (the recruits) will all be heading to the Central region. Or what ever region has been receiving 5, or more bids at that time. Again ... is this fair and will it promote the future of Division I-AA?

4. So we are all in agreement, in the elimination of the regions all together? After all the NCAA Division I basketball tournament is a "money-maker". Well, obviously we have not been following the news lately, as the ACC ... to increase it's standing in the country ... raided the Big East. Which in-turn raided the CUSA, which in turn raided the MAC. Will we be losing more members of the GFC to the MAC? (Youngstown is "smack in the middle of 'MAC-Country'" and plays MAC schools on a regular basis). All of this occurred because the BCS does not have any geographical structure {no regions and it ignores conferences}. mmm ... let's see ... in order to see the possibility of a third bid, the GFC took YSU (although an independent) and then raided the Ohio Valley for WKU ... boy did those moves pay-off? Considering they have brought the GFC 6 play-off appearances and 2 national titles ... I would say so. How about the fact that the OVC raided the Southland to fill the void? Just think how bad it will be if we remove I-AA regional affiliations? Heck, the entire western united states will be lucky to see 2 bids (remember 1/2 of the Southland is in Louisiana ... currently a state attached to the South region. However, they currently are governed by the West and luckily play in that region).

     I realize this is a great amount to "digest" in a week, but we (as fans of the greatest division in college football), need to look beyond our alma matter's and see I-AA as a whole. Even the BCS is "changing their tune" and many feel they are heading into a play-off. Have a look: BCS in Serious trouble?

     Remember the only sport in college today ... that does not have a play-off/tournament is IA college football. So let's not make the same mistakes as the "big boys" or we will find the members of 4 to 6 "power conferences" controlling our play-off. Keep regional integrity and equality in the I-AA tournament.