Link: 1A opponent prospects to replace 1AA on schedule?

ALA2262 · Apr 16, 2016

Almost everyone hates the 1AA opponent. The problem is the timing. We are talking next to last week of the season here. All but a handful of 1A teams are playing conference games that week. And long term, all of that handful have Bowl aspirations whether they are realistic or not. Bama is the LAST place you want your team scheduled on the next to last week and wind up needing two wins in the last two games to go Bowling. Any AD with half a brain is NOT going to schedule Bama that week.

However, there are two long term prospects. IF they remain 1A Independents after the 2017 season. And that would be Idaho and New Mexico State. I suspect Idaho will drop down to 1AA.

"The Idaho Vandals and the New Mexico State Aggies will depart the Sun Belt Conference in football after the 2017 season, the conference announced today.

Idaho and New Mexico State both joined the Sun Belt Conference in 2014 for football only after the demise of the WAC in 2012 and one season as FBS Independents in 2013.

Both schools signed four-year agreements to play in the Sun Belt through 2017. Those agreements will expire without renewal."

Idaho, New Mexico State to Depart Sun Belt after 2017 Season

4Q Basket Case · Apr 16, 2016

I really think the NCAA made a mistake on the rule preventing FBS schools from playing FCS schools. Two reasons for that:

First, especially in the SEC, y need some easy weeks to heal up and refresh mentally. Eight SEC games, six of which are in the SEC west, is just a physical and mental grind. You need the intra-season rest.

Second, playing these games is the only way these FCS schools can maintain their programs to the desired level. They need the money. If they don't have this income, expect several to shut down -- which hurts (no surprise here) kids who don't have a realistic shot at the NFL, but could get a fully-scholarshipped education at an FCS school.

Add this to the almost infinitely long list of well-intended actions by these pinheads that have wholly-unintended consequences.

Crimson1967 · Apr 16, 2016

The NCAA has not banned FCS games. The Big Ten has banned them on a conference level.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ALA2262 · Apr 16, 2016

4Q Basket Case said:
I really think the NCAA made a mistake on the rule preventing FBS schools from playing FCS schools. Two reasons for that:

First, especially in the SEC, y need some easy weeks to heal up and refresh mentally. Eight SEC games, six of which are in the SEC west, is just a physical and mental grind. You need the intra-season rest.

Second, playing these games is the only way these FCS schools can maintain their programs to the desired level. They need the money. If they don't have this income, expect several to shut down -- which hurts (no surprise here) kids who don't have a realistic shot at the NFL, but could get a fully-scholarshipped education at an FCS school.

Add this to the almost infinitely long list of well-intended actions by these pinheads that have wholly-unintended consequences.

To the contrary, the NCAA added the 12th game to the schedule in order to allow more 1A-1AA match-ups. On the EXACT same day they abolished the rule that prohibited 1A schools from playing 1AA schools more than once every four years.

Crimson1967 · Apr 16, 2016

If FBS teams were banned from playing FCS, I wonder if it would be mathematically possible for everyone to play a full schedule.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

4Q Basket Case · Apr 16, 2016

Thanks for the correction!

I'd heard so much from so many sources that I erroneously thought it was an NCAA rule.

This kind of accuracy is what makes TF the best board on the net.

ALA2262 · Apr 16, 2016

Crimson1967 said:
If FBS teams were banned from playing FCS, I wonder if it would be mathematically possible for everyone to play a full schedule.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, because there are 128 FBS schools this year. Would not be with an uneven number.

CHATTBRIT · Apr 16, 2016

4Q Basket Case said:
First, especially in the SEC, y need some easy weeks to heal up and refresh mentally. Eight SEC games, six of which are in the SEC west, is just a physical and mental grind. You need the intra-season rest.

Second, playing these games is the only way these FCS schools can maintain their programs to the desired level. They need the money. If they don't have this income, expect several to shut down -- which hurts (no surprise here) kids who don't have a realistic shot at the NFL, but could get a fully-scholarshipped education at an FCS school.

Add this to the almost infinitely long list of well-intended actions by these pinheads that have wholly-unintended consequences.

Have to agree. FCS schools absolutely depend on these games v. big 1-A schools like Bama v. Chattanooga the week before the Iron Bowl. Without these paydays for the FCS schools, their football program will definitely be diminished, if you not ending it. Not being melodramatic here, just stating a fact

IndyBison · Apr 16, 2016

Not every FCS school does it to help meet their budget, but many do. For some it's even a step down in competition. It's the FCS bottom feeders that give these games a bad name.

KrAzY3 · Apr 17, 2016

I have absolutely no issue at all with the SEC playing FCS schools. Alabama's SoS last year was #1. That's right, the toughest schedule in the entire nation. Clemson, who had their SoS boosted by the additional playoff game/playing the best team in the nation came in at 21. What possible good could playing another FBS program do Alabama? I see no benefit. There is no issue at all with SoS in the SEC. There is however one in other conferences. For instance last year Ohio State had the 60th SoS. That's right, 60....

JessN · Apr 17, 2016

I don't hate D-1AA games at all. I'm a pragmatist. I'm for whatever gets the trophy at the end. If that means 15 games against the local high school, so be it.

There are two downsides to D-1AA games. One is you schedule one good enough to upset you. At Alabama, this doesn't seem to be much of a problem, but you have to be careful who you schedule, as the top 5-10 percent of D-1AA is better than the bottom 10 percent of FBS in most years. The second is injury. When there's such a differential in speed and ability, technique suffers, and for lack of a better way to state it, FBS players are tuned to get hit by other FBS players with good technique. I've seen Alabama lose a bunch of guys to moderate-to-severe injuries when playing the worst teams on its schedule, in part because the other guys don't know how to tackle.

Particularly the week before the Auburn game, I want Alabama playing the weakest team it can find. I would prefer to play the band that weekend, if I could get the NCAA to sign off on it.

TUSKtimes · Apr 17, 2016

I do want to see a better product on Saturdays. The football season, as it is, already flies along at the speed of light. Having to absorb 3 teams that could be classified as walkovers, feels overdone. If all major conferences were in lock step on this one, our expectations for the 4 team playoff would change accordingly. Perhaps the best 2 loss team becomes the norm as the schedule toughens. Not sure why Bama wouldn't still be flexing their playoff muscle at the end. I have got to believe a much needed schedule upgrade makes the playoff committee more subjective and forgiving.

ALA2262 · Apr 17, 2016

JessN said:
I don't hate D-1AA games at all. I'm a pragmatist. I'm for whatever gets the trophy at the end. If that means 15 games against the local high school, so be it.

There are two downsides to D-1AA games. One is you schedule one good enough to upset you. At Alabama, this doesn't seem to be much of a problem, but you have to be careful who you schedule, as the top 5-10 percent of D-1AA is better than the bottom 10 percent of FBS in most years. The second is injury. When there's such a differential in speed and ability, technique suffers, and for lack of a better way to state it, FBS players are tuned to get hit by other FBS players with good technique. I've seen Alabama lose a bunch of guys to moderate-to-severe injuries when playing the worst teams on its schedule, in part because the other guys don't know how to tackle.

Particularly the week before the Auburn game, I want Alabama playing the weakest team it can find. I would prefer to play the band that weekend, if I could get the NCAA to sign off on it.

Idaho and New Mexico State fit the bill! :biggrin: I am not advocating playing 1A only. I am attempting to pacify the ones who do not see it as you and I do.

ALA2262 · Apr 17, 2016

TUSKtimes said:
I do want to see a better product on Saturdays. The football season, as it is, already flies along at the speed of light. Having to absorb 3 teams that could be classified as walkovers, feels overdone. If all major conferences were in lock step on this one, our expectations for the 4 team playoff would change accordingly. Perhaps the best 2 loss team becomes the norm as the schedule toughens. Not sure why Bama wouldn't still be flexing their playoff muscle at the end. I have got to believe a much needed schedule upgrade makes the playoff committee more subjective and forgiving.

In my mind the following is the way I see the schedule for the last 5 games of ALL future schedules.

1.
2. *u
3. SECCG
4. CFP Bowl
5. CFPNCG

In the first place, a viable opponent can not be scheduled in the week before *u. In 2015, for example, there were but 19 1A schools that were not playing conference games that week. None of which would want to be anywhere near Tuscaloosa, Alabama that week.

In the second place, if you want Bama to attempt to schedule a viable opponent on that week, then fine. I don't! In fact, what we need is a permanent 15 week season so that week can be taken off. I don't want them playing anybody!

bamachile · Apr 17, 2016

JessN said:
Particularly the week before the Auburn game, I want Alabama playing the weakest team it can find. I would prefer to play the band that weekend, if I could get the NCAA to sign off on it.

Some of those tuba players would make good nose guards...

TUSKtimes · Apr 17, 2016

ALA2262 said:
In my mind the following is the way I see the schedule for the last 5 games of ALL future schedules.

1.
2. *u
3. SECCG
4. CFP Bowl
5. CFPNCG

In the first place, a viable opponent can not be scheduled in the week before *u. In 2015, for example, there were but 19 1A schools that were not playing conference games that week. None of which would want to be anywhere near Tuscaloosa, Alabama that week. In the second place, if you want Bama to attempt to schedule a viable opponent on that week, then fine. I don't!

If it's mandated that all 5 major conferences must stop playing minor league teams, the availability of many of these big boy opponents will change as well. I just believe we can find someone who would like to play football in November.

Matt0424 · Apr 17, 2016

bamachile said:
Some of those tuba players would make good nose guards...

I played both Tuba, and Left Tackle in high school. I always loved music, but at 6'3" 298 lbs I was built for football.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

KrAzY3 · Apr 17, 2016

TUSKtimes said:
I do want to see a better product on Saturdays. The football season, as it is, already flies along at the speed of light. Having to absorb 3 teams that could be classified as walkovers, feels overdone.

The issue is that there are cupcakes in a lot of other conferences. You think the Big 10 proves anything when their teams beat Maryland for example? What this means though in the long run is the SEC has to has to soften their out of conference schedule to keep the gap from being even wider. Like I said Alabama SoS #1, Ohio State 60. There's nothing at all wrong with the Alabama product.

ALA2262 · Apr 17, 2016

TUSKtimes said:
If it's mandated that all 5 major conferences must stop playing minor league teams, the availability of many of these big boy opponents will change as well. I just believe we can find someone who would like to play football in November.

Minor league teams? I assume you are referring to what I refer to as 1AA. FCS if you insist. What makes you think that any such mandate is in the works? There is a better chance that all 1A (FBS) schools be required to play a 1AA (FCS) than there is the other way around! Read post #4 in this thread for the history of this issue. They are not going back to limited scheduling of 1AA, much less completely restricting one half of the FBS segment.

TideEngineer08 · Apr 18, 2016

I have no issue at all with playing these games, at any point during the season. What is the difference in playing the game in late November vs. early September? Heck, it's absolutely smarter to play the game late and get a breather than to waste it early on when your team is healthy.

It helps those schools out by giving them some big time money compared to what they'd otherwise make. It helps Alabama out by giving them a team that it can put away early and give its starters rest and its younger guys extra playing time.

I see no problem. Of course, I loathe the notion of doing everything to suit tv ratings and satisfy the "fan experience" too so I'm not the guy that wants tough games every single week.

Link: 1A opponent prospects to replace 1AA on schedule?

All-American

FB|BB Moderator

Hall of Fame

All-American

Hall of Fame

FB|BB Moderator

All-American

Hall of Fame

1st Team

Hall of Fame

Administrator & Editor-in-Chief

1st Team

All-American

All-American

Hall of Fame

1st Team

All-American

Hall of Fame

All-American

TideFans Legend

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!