Big Sky Football Non-conference Analysis Article

[91catAlum]

https://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/17563

Montana State: @ Texas Tech (FBS), vs. Southeast Missouri State, @ Western Illinois, vs. Norfolk State.

The Bobcats, like Montana, are playing some teams from outside the normal Big Sky footprint - and that’s a great thing. The opener at Texas Tech will be tough, as should the second and third games. Norfolk State should supply a good walk through before conference play.

[PHAT CAT]

Thanks for posting this 91catAlum. Pretty interesting to see who everyone is playing.

[Cataholic]

This is interesting. The three strongest FCS conferences are arguably the Colonial, MVFC and Big Sky. The Colonial actually had six teams make the playoffs last year but they did not fare well with 4 teams losing in week 1. The only CAA team to get a win over a non-CAA team in the playoffs was Maine.

So this year the MVFC and Big Sky play 10 non-conference games against each other where losses ultimately affect your conference’s perceived strength. Completely the opposite at the Colonial Conference where they have scheduled 19 games against two of the weaker conferences: Patriot and Northeast. Does their scheduling produce more “non-conference” wins (over a subpar opponent) and inflate the league’s perceived strength? While the selection committee examines individual quality wins, I wonder how much each “conference’s strength” plays into selections. The CAA clearly should not have had 6 teams in the FCS playoffs last year.

[grizzh8r]

Hmm, out of all of those schedules, I like the cats schedule the best. And I'd think that if I wasn't a cat fan. Only one FBS, no lower division schools, good mix of home vs road and challenging opponents but mostly very winnable. One of the better non conference schedules I've seen for MSU in a some time.

Oh, and Portland State's schedule is atrociously bad...

[RickRund]

I see where Weber is playing unr. unr better bring their A+ game. Would love to see Weber put a hurting on them. But in an site a couple of months ago would have sworn that UCD was playing unr.

How is Weebs young QB coming along after that nasty injury last year?

[asstastic]

This is interesting. The three strongest FCS conferences are arguably the Colonial, MVFC and Big Sky. The Colonial actually had six teams make the playoffs last year but they did not fare well with 4 teams losing in week 1. The only CAA team to get a win over a non-CAA team in the playoffs was Maine.

So this year the MVFC and Big Sky play 10 non-conference games against each other where losses ultimately affect your conference’s perceived strength. Completely the opposite at the Colonial Conference where they have scheduled 19 games against two of the weaker conferences: Patriot and Northeast. Does their scheduling produce more “non-conference” wins (over a subpar opponent) and inflate the league’s perceived strength? While the selection committee examines individual quality wins, I wonder how much each “conference’s strength” plays into selections. The CAA clearly should not have had 6 teams in the FCS playoffs last year.

I’m fairly sure the Big Sky sent a record # of teams to the playoffs one of Ash’s last years and they had all but 1 bow out first round..? 5 teams, anybody else remember that?

[Cataholic]

This is interesting. The three strongest FCS conferences are arguably the Colonial, MVFC and Big Sky. The Colonial actually had six teams make the playoffs last year but they did not fare well with 4 teams losing in week 1. The only CAA team to get a win over a non-CAA team in the playoffs was Maine.

So this year the MVFC and Big Sky play 10 non-conference games against each other where losses ultimately affect your conference’s perceived strength. Completely the opposite at the Colonial Conference where they have scheduled 19 games against two of the weaker conferences: Patriot and Northeast. Does their scheduling produce more “non-conference” wins (over a subpar opponent) and inflate the league’s perceived strength? While the selection committee examines individual quality wins, I wonder how much each “conference’s strength” plays into selections. The CAA clearly should not have had 6 teams in the FCS playoffs last year.

I’m fairly sure the Big Sky sent a record # of teams to the playoffs one of Ash’s last years and they had all but 1 bow out first round..? 5 teams, anybody else remember that?

I don’t ever remember getting in 5. But Big Sky had 4 teams last year and every team won at least one game and advanced. Hard to argue that the CAA is stronger than the Big Sky based on the playoff performance last year.

My point though was that the CAA has 19 games against two of the weakest conferences in the country. The Big Sky and MVFC beat up each other in non-conference games. Do these non-conference W-L mislead analysts? For example, if the Big Sky and MVFC split games, but the CAA goes 17-2 against the Patriot and NE, I am guessing the CAA will get more love than our conference.

[asstastic]

This is interesting. The three strongest FCS conferences are arguably the Colonial, MVFC and Big Sky. The Colonial actually had six teams make the playoffs last year but they did not fare well with 4 teams losing in week 1. The only CAA team to get a win over a non-CAA team in the playoffs was Maine.

So this year the MVFC and Big Sky play 10 non-conference games against each other where losses ultimately affect your conference’s perceived strength. Completely the opposite at the Colonial Conference where they have scheduled 19 games against two of the weaker conferences: Patriot and Northeast. Does their scheduling produce more “non-conference” wins (over a subpar opponent) and inflate the league’s perceived strength? While the selection committee examines individual quality wins, I wonder how much each “conference’s strength” plays into selections. The CAA clearly should not have had 6 teams in the FCS playoffs last year.

I’m fairly sure the Big Sky sent a record # of teams to the playoffs one of Ash’s last years and they had all but 1 bow out first round..? 5 teams, anybody else remember that?

I don’t ever remember getting in 5. But Big Sky had 4 teams last year and every team won at least one game and advanced. Hard to argue that the CAA is stronger than the Big Sky based on the playoff performance last year.

My point though was that the CAA has 19 games against two of the weakest conferences in the country. The Big Sky and MVFC beat up each other in non-conference games. Do these non-conference W-L mislead analysts? For example, if the Big Sky and MVFC split games, but the CAA goes 17-2 against the Patriot and NE, I am guessing the CAA will get more love than our conference.

I agree with your point, you just made me think about the Big Sky laying an egg.

[Rich K]

This is interesting. The three strongest FCS conferences are arguably the Colonial, MVFC and Big Sky. The Colonial actually had six teams make the playoffs last year but they did not fare well with 4 teams losing in week 1. The only CAA team to get a win over a non-CAA team in the playoffs was Maine.

So this year the MVFC and Big Sky play 10 non-conference games against each other where losses ultimately affect your conference’s perceived strength. Completely the opposite at the Colonial Conference where they have scheduled 19 games against two of the weaker conferences: Patriot and Northeast. Does their scheduling produce more “non-conference” wins (over a subpar opponent) and inflate the league’s perceived strength? While the selection committee examines individual quality wins, I wonder how much each “conference’s strength” plays into selections. The CAA clearly should not have had 6 teams in the FCS playoffs last year.

I’m fairly sure the Big Sky sent a record # of teams to the playoffs one of Ash’s last years and they had all but 1 bow out first round..? 5 teams, anybody else remember that?

One of those years (2012) Sam Houston State knocked every Big Sky Team out of the playoffs on it's way to a runner-up finish. That was harsh.

[Cataholic]

This is interesting. The three strongest FCS conferences are arguably the Colonial, MVFC and Big Sky. The Colonial actually had six teams make the playoffs last year but they did not fare well with 4 teams losing in week 1. The only CAA team to get a win over a non-CAA team in the playoffs was Maine.

So this year the MVFC and Big Sky play 10 non-conference games against each other where losses ultimately affect your conference’s perceived strength. Completely the opposite at the Colonial Conference where they have scheduled 19 games against two of the weaker conferences: Patriot and Northeast. Does their scheduling produce more “non-conference” wins (over a subpar opponent) and inflate the league’s perceived strength? While the selection committee examines individual quality wins, I wonder how much each “conference’s strength” plays into selections. The CAA clearly should not have had 6 teams in the FCS playoffs last year.

I’m fairly sure the Big Sky sent a record # of teams to the playoffs one of Ash’s last years and they had all but 1 bow out first round..? 5 teams, anybody else remember that?

I don’t ever remember getting in 5. But Big Sky had 4 teams last year and every team won at least one game and advanced. Hard to argue that the CAA is stronger than the Big Sky based on the playoff performance last year.

My point though was that the CAA has 19 games against two of the weakest conferences in the country. The Big Sky and MVFC beat up each other in non-conference games. Do these non-conference W-L mislead analysts? For example, if the Big Sky and MVFC split games, but the CAA goes 17-2 against the Patriot and NE, I am guessing the CAA will get more love than our conference.

I agree with your point, you just made me think about the Big Sky laying an egg.