Interesting playoff scheduling bits...

[LDopaPDX]

Of the 20 playoff teams...

ALL played at least 5 home games. 12/20 (60%) played at least 6 home games. Sam Houston State played 7.

ONLY 3 of 20 opened with 2 games on the road... The remaining 85% all played at home within the first two weekends. ONLY one, New Hampshire, opened with 3 straight on the road (coincidentally, UNH also played 6 home games, meaning 6 of the last 8 were at home).

19/20, or 95%, played one FBS game or less. ONLY one, Stony Brook, played two FBS games in the same season... against UTEP and Buffalo (ironically, Stony Brook also played a D-II program and had 6 home games). No team attempted two BCS teams or one BCS / one FBS in the same season.

45%, or 9 of 20, played at least one D-II or lower opponent in the season.

Interestingly, after reviewing each team's schedule, I'd say Wofford and Northern Iowa appeared to have the "toughest" routes to the post-season. Sam Houston State appeared to have the easiest... really the only tough games they'd played were New Mexico (bottom of the FBS heap) and Central Arkansas + having 7 of 11 at home.

What can be extracted from this?

Successful teams always play at least 5 home games, although 6 is preferable. It is counterproductive to schedule more than one FBS game, although one seems fairly standard. Choosing to schedule a D-II school may or may not help, but it probably isn't hurting you. And opening the season by playing multiple times on the road is not a recipe for success. If you are going to play 2 straight roadies to open the year, or even three, you better be making up for it by scheduling more homes than aways in total.

These are the facts. This is what works. You can see a lot of what we did at the admin level really hurt our chances this year. But that part is over. Now we need to address these admin issues so they aren't staring us in the face as hurdles that keep us out in 2012. Really, all of our current scheduling missteps in 2012 could be fixed with a change in the first weekend, axing Idaho for someone else. Can we find a Southland team for a home/home? Or maybe an OVC home/home?

 

[kalm]

No question about what's optimum but before taking the admin to task...again, what's the attendance like for the at larges? What's their proximity to ooc FCS programs. Also, your sampling size might be a little small. A couple more years added to the study might provide even stronger support. But thanks for doing the leg work on this Dopa, it's a good discussion to keep going. :thumb:

 

[Rontheoldwiseeagle]

Did you forward this info in an e-mail to the AD's office and to Bo? Stats they should see.

 

[vetteman]

Of the 20 playoff teams...

ALL played at least 5 home games. 12/20 (60%) played at least 6 home games. Sam Houston State played 7.

ONLY 3 of 20 opened with 2 games on the road... The remaining 85% all played at home within the first two weekends. ONLY one, New Hampshire, opened with 3 straight on the road (coincidentally, UNH also played 6 home games, meaning 6 of the last 8 were at home).

19/20, or 95%, played one FBS game or less. ONLY one, Stony Brook, played two FBS games in the same season... against UTEP and Buffalo (ironically, Stony Brook also played a D-II program and had 6 home games). No team attempted two BCS teams or one BCS / one FBS in the same season.

45%, or 9 of 20, played at least one D-II or lower opponent in the season.

Interestingly, after reviewing each team's schedule, I'd say Wofford and Northern Iowa appeared to have the "toughest" routes to the post-season. Sam Houston State appeared to have the easiest... really the only tough games they'd played were New Mexico (bottom of the FBS heap) and Central Arkansas + having 7 of 11 at home.

What can be extracted from this?

Successful teams always play at least 5 home games, although 6 is preferable. It is counterproductive to schedule more than one FBS game, although one seems fairly standard. Choosing to schedule a D-II school may or may not help, but it probably isn't hurting you. And opening the season by playing multiple times on the road is not a recipe for success. If you are going to play 2 straight roadies to open the year, or even three, you better be making up for it by scheduling more homes than aways in total.

These are the facts. This is what works. You can see a lot of what we did at the admin level really hurt our chances this year. But that part is over. Now we need to address these admin issues so they aren't staring us in the face as hurdles that keep us out in 2012. Really, all of our current scheduling missteps in 2012 could be fixed with a change in the first weekend, axing Idaho for someone else. Can we find a Southland team for a home/home? Or maybe an OVC home/home?

Well I guess we could have been the exception to the rule. If BK catches that pass at UW instead of a Trufant interception we win 7 games, we play in the playoffs, and none of this matters. We were a couple plays away from the playoffs even with all the injuries, three opening games on the road,playing a FBS team, four home games, etc.

I will let the coaches coach and the AD run the athletic dept. and we as fans and parents should cheer our team on in victory and defeat. I dont think the athletic dept. will start letting fans make their decisions good, bad, or otherwise. We must trust them and their decisions.

 

[Spoeagle]

Vetteman,
+1 you nailed it. Dads of Eagle players (and Hannah!) seem to have a good understanding of how an athletic department operates.

 

[kalm]

Of the 20 playoff teams...

ALL played at least 5 home games. 12/20 (60%) played at least 6 home games. Sam Houston State played 7.

ONLY 3 of 20 opened with 2 games on the road... The remaining 85% all played at home within the first two weekends. ONLY one, New Hampshire, opened with 3 straight on the road (coincidentally, UNH also played 6 home games, meaning 6 of the last 8 were at home).

19/20, or 95%, played one FBS game or less. ONLY one, Stony Brook, played two FBS games in the same season... against UTEP and Buffalo (ironically, Stony Brook also played a D-II program and had 6 home games). No team attempted two BCS teams or one BCS / one FBS in the same season.

45%, or 9 of 20, played at least one D-II or lower opponent in the season.

Interestingly, after reviewing each team's schedule, I'd say Wofford and Northern Iowa appeared to have the "toughest" routes to the post-season. Sam Houston State appeared to have the easiest... really the only tough games they'd played were New Mexico (bottom of the FBS heap) and Central Arkansas + having 7 of 11 at home.

What can be extracted from this?

Successful teams always play at least 5 home games, although 6 is preferable. It is counterproductive to schedule more than one FBS game, although one seems fairly standard. Choosing to schedule a D-II school may or may not help, but it probably isn't hurting you. And opening the season by playing multiple times on the road is not a recipe for success. If you are going to play 2 straight roadies to open the year, or even three, you better be making up for it by scheduling more homes than aways in total.

These are the facts. This is what works. You can see a lot of what we did at the admin level really hurt our chances this year. But that part is over. Now we need to address these admin issues so they aren't staring us in the face as hurdles that keep us out in 2012. Really, all of our current scheduling missteps in 2012 could be fixed with a change in the first weekend, axing Idaho for someone else. Can we find a Southland team for a home/home? Or maybe an OVC home/home?

Well I guess we could have been the exception to the rule. If BK catches that pass at UW instead of a Trufant interception we win 7 games, we play in the playoffs, and none of this matters. We were a couple plays away from the playoffs even with all the injuries, three opening games on the road,playing a FBS team, four home games, etc.

I will let the coaches coach and the AD run the athletic dept. and we as fans and parents should cheer our team on in victory and defeat. I dont think the athletic dept. will start letting fans make their decisions good, bad, or otherwise. We must trust them and their decisions.

But in Dopa's defense, there are cases of AD's making big mistakes when it comes to FCS football. Take, for example, this year's JMU debacle where they just built a $67 million brand new stadium, averaged 24,000 (3rd in FCS) in attendance and got outbid by EKU who only averages 7,000+ in attendance to host a first round playoff game. They are calling for the AD's head on a platter.

Some of us have followed this level of football far longer than the admin has.

 

[LDopaPDX]

I appreciate the bravado of the player's parents, and I understand the "bring on all comers" mentality. The problem is that bravado is falwed. There are a lot of good teams out there, in league play and out, and many can beat you if you aren't 100%. The job of admin is to best create a situation where the team can maximize their success, and NEVER create a hinderance to success.

Bravado aside, history teaches us there is a right way to schedule and a wrong way. The wrong way doesn't automatically mean you will fail, nor does the right way automically make you succeed. But when you can't control what happens on the field, you sure better do your best to control what you can and give the kids the tools they need.

Our admin didn't do that in 2011 and, as of now, they aren't doing it again in 2012. I know there are coaches who agree with what I'm saying 100%.

 

[marceagfan5]

I appreciate the bravado of the player's parents, and I understand the "bring on all comers" mentality. The problem is that bravado is falwed. There are a lot of good teams out there, in league play and out, and many can beat you if you aren't 100%. The job of admin is to best create a situation where the team can maximize their success, and NEVER create a hinderance to success.

Bravado aside, history teaches us there is a right way to schedule and a wrong way. The wrong way doesn't automatically mean you will fail, nor does the right way automically make you succeed. But when you can't control what happens on the field, you sure better do your best to control what you can and give the kids the tools they need.

Our admin didn't do that in 2011 and, as of now, they aren't doing it again in 2012. I know there are coaches who agree with what I'm saying 100%.

We definitely have some great players and great parents in this program, the administration needs to figure out how to put these players and our team in the best position to win, the current scheduling system just doesn't work. This year we have 4 home games and 7 road with 4 straight to start the season on the road. Next year it is 5 home games, 6 on the road, with 2 FBS and 3 straight to start on the road. We can definitely have a great season next year, but the schedule isnt doing us any favors.