... In the Pocket ...

The I-AA Play-off System

There has been much discussion over the current play-off system. However, most all fans agree that the play-off system is a tremendous asset to I-AA football. This article is not meant to infer any desperate need to expand, but merely look at options that could be considered. With the recent additions of the Big South and Great West conferences, there does seem to be some need to expand the system. In last month's annual meeting. the NCAA has decided that the possibility of expanding the I-AA play-off, is a positive move. We favor the 24-team format.

Arguments for the 24-team Expansion:

• With the addition of many new teams and conferences, a "sweet-16" format may not provide enough positions to adequately represent each region and conference.
• Many conferences are going to be expanding to a size that will not allow enough out-of-conference matches during the regular season. With the additional teams in the post-season, there will not be the need for the 8 automatic-bid conferences to expand.
• I have long been upset over the NCAA's move away from the 4 regions. To me, the competition between regions is perhaps the most exciting part of the game. With our proposed post-season format change, the NCAA can dramatically increase the national aspect of I-AA ball, by a return to a more regional approach to the play-off. This approach will add a third level of achievement to the existing levels of accomplishment. Currently, I-AA recognizes conference champions and a national champion. The 24-team approach will allow for a regional championship round ... which should include highest accolades of a trophy and player rings.
• The 24-team play-off will allow an incentive to the 8 automatic-bid conference (or 8 regionally-seeded) teams, of a bye-week.

Arguments Against the 24-team Expansion:

• The addition of another week, may be too much for many student-athletes ... who must balance studies and finals, with football.
• Many teams may not have the depth to perform for an additional week.
• Many favor a national approach, and do not like the regional aspects of a 24-team tournament.

The 24-Team Format:

• Everyone involved with Pete's Power Poll agree that certain teams should have a week off. However, the decision as to which teams should be rewarded with this time off is divided into two groups.
  • Some feel that the reward should go to the top-8 (or seeded) clubs. It is a way of rewarding the best teams in the nation, and most agree that there should be two bye-week clubs in each region. This will also allow the NCAA to more strongly consider attendance, location and monies involved. In addition, it is only a matter of time before the Great West and Big South demand auto-bids, making more than 8 auto-bid conferences to seed.
  • Some feel that the 8 automatic-bid conference winners should receive the week off, as this will give an additional incentive for conferences to improve. It will also add an additional element of prestige to a conference crown, and the rewards of a seed and week to rest and prepare.
• Which ever way is chosen, the resulting week off is a positive element to the 24-team play-off. I personally feel the NCAA should offer the bye weeks to the conference winners. If, and when, additional conferences are given an automatic bid ... then consider seeding the top-8 teams in each conference on a rotating basis. This eliminates personal opinions ... the result of which left finalist Montana (and the West region) with out a seed in 2004. There is also the aspect that some feel there should only be 20 teams in the post-season, with 1 team from each region receiving a bye week. Some also feel there should be 28 teams, with 4 regional bye-week teams. This is currently done quite successfully in D-III, and will be covered in a later column.

1. Round-1: The first round will be all at-large teams playing in the order they are seeded. We do believe that in any tournament (as with NCAA basketball) ALL teams should be seeded. As with the current system, teams from one region may be placed in another region to play. However, every effort is to be made to maintain a regional affiliation (Big Sky and Southland in the West, Gateway and Ohio Valley in the Central, Southern and Mid-Atlantic in the South, A-10 and Patriot in the East). Also, the current rule of "no teams from the same conference playing each other in round-1"... should be modified to state that "no teams that have already faced each other in the current season can meet in round-1". Although this may sound like the same statement ... it is not. This change becomes crucial ... especially now that A-10 teams are not required to face every conference team during the regular season. Again, 8 teams will not play in the first-round.
2. Round-2: The second-round will match the two regionally-seeded clubs against the winners of the round-1 contests. At this point, teams may face each other, even if they have already met during the regular season. The seeded (bye-week) teams will always have home field advantage in this round. To strengthen the commitment ... all seeded teams are required to provide a minimum financial guarantee to the NCAA.
3. Regional Final: Round-3 will become known as the "Regional Championship", as the winners will be crowned 'regional champions'. As stated previously, this should be considered a great honor, and rewards of a trophy and rings should be provided. 20% of each of the 8 bye-week club's financial guarantee