Quantcast
Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
h8r

FHSAA football advisory committee/RPI included

Recommended Posts

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/highschool/os-sp-hs-fhsaa-football-system-0111-story.html

 

lots of things here, 

6 quarter rule is long, long, long overdue,

but adding in rpi type info for playoffs?  does this make it cloudier to find out who is in?  last 2 years you could just keep track of who won and lost and figure out pretty quickly.  

thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you have to schedule a team, that's going to schedule good teams, and the teams that they scheduled will have to schedule good teams, and those teams will have to schedule good teams, and then those teams will have to schedule good teams, also ...............

So how do you know who to play???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That 6-quarter rule is going to be an administrative nightmare for somebody.  Does one play in a quarter constitute playing in that quarter?  Who's going to keep track of how many plays and in which quarters a kid played?  I can't wait until the end of the year when some team comes forward claiming a kid played in more than 6 quarters in a week and that this should result in a forfeit for the kid's team, which then results in a loss for that team,  which then changes the Category a team is in, which then affects another teams  Power Ranking Average, which then determines who makes the playoffs (or, if the new rules are in place, affects a team's RPI, which then determines who gets into the playoffs and/or who gets to host and who has to travel). 

I can see it now.  "Uh, Mr. HUDL, there's a process server at the door with a subpoena who needs digital copies of all your varsity and JV game film on Random High School to determine if Johnny Jones played in more than 6 quarters in any week this past season."

Administrative nightmares aside, what's a reasonable recovery period?  In most counties, don't they play JV games on Thursdays and Varsity games on Fridays?  Playing in two games on back-to-back nights is going to be hard on kids.   Yeah, I understand that kids who play 4 quarters of a JV game one night aren't likely to get much playing time the next night in the varsity game.  And kids who are expected to play 4 quarters of a varsity game probably won't be asked to play much in the JV game the night before.  But, still...  coaches looking to gain an edge or win a game have been known to do things that aren't necessarily in every kids' best interests. 

By the way, how are OT's handled?  Are they considered an extra quarter? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RPI system...yet another method to figure out which teams get the pleasure of being eliminated in the first round:rolleyes: (see my prior threads on how well, or not-so-well, the "bubble" teams have performed in the playoffs).  

And as far as home field advantage, I believe that has not held back the best teams from winning titles, regardless of how determined.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the 6 qtr rule is long overdue, but yes someone is going to be paperwork crazy.  and yes those numbers will be fudged.

I asked the same question, is 1 play a quarter?  probably doesnt constitute a full quarter if he was only involved in 1 play, but if he played 4 plays, 1 in each quarter?  is that 4 quarters?  some logistics that needs to be talked about. 

the rpi,,,,,like said above who you played, played, played played, and you get x amount of points for each of those things to warrant wether you made playoffs.

seems like just another ignorant step in the process of determining who should and who shouldnt make it.

leave it the same, just lower the loss points by 5 and you dont have a coin flip for 0-10 team getting in like we did this year.....

we got beat a team that played good teams that played bad teams that played worse teams,,,,,not a good system.  least from what we read so far....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HOLY COMPLICATION BATMAN!  LOL

Hey I like that their trying but you have just added: Mandatory filming of JV games.

I still think a well tested power rating like a LAZ or PINKOs would work better.

Seems the RPI is to stop all of us basic math coaches to be able to figure out the process/results to be able to complain about the problems!:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Georgia has a 6-quarter rule and it starts on Friday. So, if a kid doesn’t play at all on Friday night they can play a full Freshman/JV game the following week. 

 

I can see it being a pain, but your Friday night kids aren’t likely to play JV ball on a Thursday unless they’re like third-teamers. 

 

Keeping track of it sounds like a nightmare though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Coach said:

Georgia has a 6-quarter rule and it starts on Friday. So, if a kid doesn’t play at all on Friday night they can play a full Freshman/JV game the following week. 

 

I can see it being a pain, but your Friday night kids aren’t likely to play JV ball on a Thursday unless they’re like third-teamers. 

 

Keeping track of it sounds like a nightmare though...

Hmmm, that also means a kid could play 4 quarters in a JV game on Thursday night and then turn around and play 4 quarters in the varsity game the following night, since the "new week" starts on Friday, right?    Again, you wouldn't think a coach would go into the week thinking this, but what if the varsity team loses a couple of starters to injuries mid-way through the first quarter and the kid who played the JV game the night before is the proverbial 'next man up' at that position?

For anyone who ever coached Little League All-Stars, you know how hard it is to make sure that every kid gets their required defensive inning(s) and at-bats.  High school football coaches would be in the same position.  I can just see the finger-pointing that's going to go on when a varsity team has to forfeit a game because the JV coach told the varsity coach that James only played 2 quarters in the JV game because some parent volunteer got distracted at that JV game by a neighbor with some juicy gossip and forgot to mark down that James played in that one Jumbo package in the 3rd quarter when the team needed to pick up a crucial 4th down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Perspective said:

Hmmm, that also means a kid could play 4 quarters in a JV game on Thursday night and then turn around and play 4 quarters in the varsity game the following night, since the "new week" starts on Friday, right?    Again, you wouldn't think a coach would go into the week thinking this, but what if the varsity team loses a couple of starters to injuries mid-way through the first quarter and the kid who played the JV game the night before is the proverbial 'next man up' at that position?

For anyone who ever coached Little League All-Stars, you know how hard it is to make sure that every kid gets their required defensive inning(s) and at-bats.  High school football coaches would be in the same position.  I can just see the finger-pointing that's going to go on when a varsity team has to forfeit a game because the JV coach told the varsity coach that James only played 2 quarters in the JV game because some parent volunteer got distracted at that JV game by a neighbor with some juicy gossip and forgot to mark down that James played in that one Jumbo package in the 3rd quarter when the team needed to pick up a crucial 4th down. 

Technically a kid could play 4 then 4, but they'd have to sit out varsity time the prior week. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/11/2019 at 9:42 AM, Perspective said:

That 6-quarter rule is going to be an administrative nightmare for somebody.  Does one play in a quarter constitute playing in that quarter?  Who's going to keep track of how many plays and in which quarters a kid played?  I can't wait until the end of the year when some team comes forward claiming a kid played in more than 6 quarters in a week and that this should result in a forfeit for the kid's team, which then results in a loss for that team,  which then changes the Category a team is in, which then affects another teams  Power Ranking Average, which then determines who makes the playoffs (or, if the new rules are in place, affects a team's RPI, which then determines who gets into the playoffs and/or who gets to host and who has to travel). 

I can see it now.  "Uh, Mr. HUDL, there's a process server at the door with a subpoena who needs digital copies of all your varsity and JV game film on Random High School to determine if Johnny Jones played in more than 6 quarters in any week this past season."

Administrative nightmares aside, what's a reasonable recovery period?  In most counties, don't they play JV games on Thursdays and Varsity games on Fridays?  Playing in two games on back-to-back nights is going to be hard on kids.   Yeah, I understand that kids who play 4 quarters of a JV game one night aren't likely to get much playing time the next night in the varsity game.  And kids who are expected to play 4 quarters of a varsity game probably won't be asked to play much in the JV game the night before.  But, still...  coaches looking to gain an edge or win a game have been known to do things that aren't necessarily in every kids' best interests. 

By the way, how are OT's handled?  Are they considered an extra quarter? 

Be honest your just worried about Plant getting shellacked by this rule LOL.

Nah I get you... this could be a nightmare... They would literally have to set the number of plays which equates a qtr... It will not stop some petty pissed off coach from spending hours on HUDL to find wrong doing and reporting them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, peezy28 said:

Be honest your just worried about Plant getting shellacked by this rule LOL.

Nah I get you... this could be a nightmare... They would literally have to set the number of plays which equates a qtr... It will not stop some petty pissed off coach from spending hours on HUDL to find wrong doing and reporting them.

Peezy, I'm much more concerned about the RPI issue than the "6 quarter" one.   As long as I've been around the Plant program, there has been very little (if any) movement of players between the Varsity and the JV until the JV season is over, at which time a small number of JV kids get 'called up' to the varsity to get a taste of varsity football before they move up for good.   Even on the varsity's off week, the varsity coaches won't even let the handful of sophomore varsity players 'play down' for the JV game that week to get game reps. 

Now, the RPI issue is one that concerns me, for the same reason that the power ranking averages have concerned me over the last two years.   As you (and perhaps others on this Board) know, Plant is in the Hillsborough Public School district.  As such, it has little or no control over its regular season schedule.  Which, of course, means that it can't play the game that other schools got real good at real fast and racking up power rating points -- even in a losing effort.  And while a home playoff game instead of a road playoff game vs. Lakeland this past year probably wouldn't have mattered, I'm a firm believer that Plant would have come out ahead of Bartram Trail a year ago had that game been played at Dad's Stadium instead of in Jacksonville.  No disrespect to BT; that's just my view.  In the past, a perennial playoff team could at least count on a late playoffs home game every other year; now, you might not ever get one after the first round.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Perspective said:

Peezy, I'm much more concerned about the RPI issue than the "6 quarter" one.   As long as I've been around the Plant program, there has been very little (if any) movement of players between the Varsity and the JV until the JV season is over, at which time a small number of JV kids get 'called up' to the varsity to get a taste of varsity football before they move up for good.   Even on the varsity's off week, the varsity coaches won't even let the handful of sophomore varsity players 'play down' for the JV game that week to get game reps. 

Now, the RPI issue is one that concerns me, for the same reason that the power ranking averages have concerned me over the last two years.   As you (and perhaps others on this Board) know, Plant is in the Hillsborough Public School district.  As such, it has little or no control over its regular season schedule.  Which, of course, means that it can't play the game that other schools got real good at real fast and racking up power rating points -- even in a losing effort.  And while a home playoff game instead of a road playoff game vs. Lakeland this past year probably wouldn't have mattered, I'm a firm believer that Plant would have come out ahead of Bartram Trail a year ago had that game been played at Dad's Stadium instead of in Jacksonville.  No disrespect to BT; that's just my view.  In the past, a perennial playoff team could at least count on a late playoffs home game every other year; now, you might not ever get one after the first round.  

County scheduling restrictions and uneven number of teams in districts potentially skew the results.  For RPI or our current system to work, in theory, such variables cannot exist.  Otherwise, certain teams have built-in handicaps.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Perspective said:

Peezy, I'm much more concerned about the RPI issue than the "6 quarter" one.   As long as I've been around the Plant program, there has been very little (if any) movement of players between the Varsity and the JV until the JV season is over, at which time a small number of JV kids get 'called up' to the varsity to get a taste of varsity football before they move up for good.   Even on the varsity's off week, the varsity coaches won't even let the handful of sophomore varsity players 'play down' for the JV game that week to get game reps. 

Now, the RPI issue is one that concerns me, for the same reason that the power ranking averages have concerned me over the last two years.   As you (and perhaps others on this Board) know, Plant is in the Hillsborough Public School district.  As such, it has little or no control over its regular season schedule.  Which, of course, means that it can't play the game that other schools got real good at real fast and racking up power rating points -- even in a losing effort.  And while a home playoff game instead of a road playoff game vs. Lakeland this past year probably wouldn't have mattered, I'm a firm believer that Plant would have come out ahead of Bartram Trail a year ago had that game been played at Dad's Stadium instead of in Jacksonville.  No disrespect to BT; that's just my view.  In the past, a perennial playoff team could at least count on a late playoffs home game every other year; now, you might not ever get one after the first round.  

If plant was healthy they probably beat them anyway

 

I still think Lakeland or viera would have beaten Bartram Trail especially since either of those 2 would have hosted them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OldSchoolLion said:

County scheduling restrictions and uneven number of teams in districts potentially skew the results.  For RPI or our current system to work, in theory, such variables cannot exist.  Otherwise, certain teams have built-in handicaps.  

Every potential system will have it's faults and failures

 

Question is what is more important in a system and what are people willing to sacrifice 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody else think the new RPI will be a huge mess and almost impossible to actually check and monitor.

Right now, if you just want to check your team's "playoff points," you have to figure out the record of the team in your team's region, who the wins were against, and what were the records of the teams they beat. Honestly, doing one region takes me on about 30-45 minutes once all the games are complete.  In the one region that I followed, I had to look at 99 teams each week. 

Under the new system, I would have to look at not just my team, but my opponent's and my opponent's opponent. We are talking easily 600+ schools each week. No thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OldSchoolLion said:

Under the new RPI system, would the 4 district champions in a region automatically get the top 4 seeds, as happens with the current system?  Thanks for the help!

Yes

 

Fhsaa confirmed that yesterday on Twitter when asked 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, gatorman-uf said:

Does anybody else think the new RPI will be a huge mess and almost impossible to actually check and monitor.

Right now, if you just want to check your team's "playoff points," you have to figure out the record of the team in your team's region, who the wins were against, and what were the records of the teams they beat. Honestly, doing one region takes me on about 30-45 minutes once all the games are complete.  In the one region that I followed, I had to look at 99 teams each week. 

Under the new system, I would have to look at not just my team, but my opponent's and my opponent's opponent. We are talking easily 600+ schools each week. No thanks. 

The point system issues we saw this year could have been fixed by increasing the region sizes in the small classes by having 2 regions instead of 4

 

Instead the brilliant people in charge think we should change to another system, SMH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OldSchoolLion said:

Under the new RPI system, would the 4 district champions in a region automatically get the top 4 seeds, as happens with the current system?  Thanks for the help!

Basically only thing changing is how the wild card teams are selected and where they seeded 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like the present system, this appears to be a "hybrid" system  using a combination of district championships and RPI for seeding  Just like I suggested for the present system, if it makes sense, then why a hybrid system and not all in, ie use RPI to seed ALL teams?  I am not suggesting that, just curious "why?" 

If the purpose of the new system is to "create better matchups,"...well, some of the most problematic matchups this past season IMO involved teams that were seeded top 4 because they won district, but obviously were much weaker than some of the lower seeds in their region.  So, if we had used RPI this past season, we likely would have had some of the same first round mismatches as below, maybe just involving different lower-seeded teams.

8A

#6 South Dade 49   #3 Hialeah 14

#5 Palmetto 45   #4 Belen Jesuit 7

 

7A

#5 Lee 48   #4 Hagerty 7

#7 Edgewater 65   #2 Buchholz 21

#5 Ft Lauderdale 54   #4 Doral Academy 7

 

6A

#5 Escambia  33   #4 St Augustine 16

#6 Northwestern 31   #3 Mainland 16

 

5A

#5 American Heritage 37   #4 Westwood 14

#6 Immokalee 45   #3 Dunbar 21

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, gatorman-uf said:

Does anybody else think the new RPI will be a huge mess and almost impossible to actually check and monitor.

Right now, if you just want to check your team's "playoff points," you have to figure out the record of the team in your team's region, who the wins were against, and what were the records of the teams they beat. Honestly, doing one region takes me on about 30-45 minutes once all the games are complete.  In the one region that I followed, I had to look at 99 teams each week. 

Under the new system, I would have to look at not just my team, but my opponent's and my opponent's opponent. We are talking easily 600+ schools each week. No thanks. 

No problem, Gatorman.  They are way ahead of us.  Each coach will be given a football-shaped computer named "RIPI."  :rolleyes:  All coach will have to do is "ASK RIPI" and he will get an up-to-the-minute update on the playoff status of his team or any other.  :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

these statements from the RPI FAQ document made me chuckle.

"Furthermore, they felt the previous ranking system, which consisted of your own winning percentage and your opponents’ winning percentage, was shallow."

...don't "they" realize football coaches/fans are shallow people and, in that sense, the old system suited us perfectly.:rolleyes:

"A major advantage to the RPI is the transparency that comes along with its accuracy. The components of the formula are known, and its results can be easily replicated. The calculation of the ranking is three layers deep, leading to more accuracy."

...by a PhD mathematician in his spare time.B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is is folks.."Just ask RIPI" for up to the minute RPI numbers, guaranteed 50% or less margin of error. :huh:  And for a small fee:rolleyes: you can get with one with your team logo.  

One can also pay extra to get the special "bitch and whine" feature.  When coach complains to RIPI about the numbers, RIPI will console you by making statements like "You're right , coach.  This new system sucks." 

Image result for football lighted computer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  



  • Posts

    • On the flip side, here are the worst winning percentages by division from 2000-2019. Same rules apply.   NCAA D1 FBS (P5) CONF W L Pct               Kansas BIG12 78 162 0.325   Duke ACC 82 161 0.337   Vanderbilt SEC 87 155 0.360   Indiana BIG10 88 152 0.367   Illinois BIG10 91 151 0.376   Colorado PAC12 102 147 0.410   Iowa St BIG12 106 142 0.427   Syracuse ACC 104 139 0.428   Kentucky SEC 107 138 0.437   Rutgers BIG10 107 138 0.437               NCAA D1 FBS (G5) CONF W L Pct               New Mexico St IND 66 176 0.273   Eastern Michigan MAC 67 172 0.280   UNLV MWC 76 166 0.314   Army IND 80 162 0.331   UTEP CUSA 82 160 0.339   Buffalo MAC 83 158 0.344   Kent St MAC 83 155 0.349   Tulane AAC 86 156 0.355   Louisiana-Monroe SBC 85 153 0.357   Akron MAC 88 153 0.365               NCAA D1 FCS CONF W L Pct               VMI SoC 49 176 0.218   Mississippi Valley St SWAC 49 169 0.225   Valparaiso (IN) PL 60 162 0.270   Rhode Island CAA 63 163 0.279   Columbia (NY) IVY 56 144 0.280   Idaho BSC 68 170 0.286 Moved down from FBS to FCS 2018 St Francis (PA) NEC 63 154 0.290   Indiana St MVFC 67 161 0.294   Austin Peay (TN) OVC 68 159 0.300   Texas Southern SWAC 67 153 0.305               NCAA D2 CONF W L Pct               Minnesota-Crookston NSC 29 188 0.134   Savannah St (GA) SIAC 37 176 0.174 moved from D2 to FCS in 2001; moved back to D2 2019 Lock Haven (PA) PSAC 39 179 0.179   Lincoln (MO) MIAA 38 169 0.184   Livingstone (NC) CIAA 40 158 0.202 Moved up from NAIA to D2 in 2002. Pace (NY) NE-10 44 158 0.218   Kentucky Wesleyan GMAC 48 160 0.231 Moved down D2 to NAIA 2004; back up to D2 in 2006  New Mexico Highlands RMC 53 163 0.245   St Anselm (NH) NE-10 51 154 0.249   Clark Atlanta (GA) SIAC 50 150 0.250               NCAA D3 CONF W L Pct               Hiram (OH) NCAC 31 169 0.155   Iowa Wesleyan UMAC 38 169 0.184 Moved from NAIA to D3 in 2013 North Park (IL) CCIW 37 163 0.185   Wilmington (OH) OAC 40 160 0.200   Whittier (CA) SCIAC 37 144 0.204   Lawrence (WI) Midwest 42 156 0.212   Hamilton (NY) NESCAC 35 128 0.215   Kenyon (OH) NCAC 44 156 0.220   Lewis & Clark (OR) NWC 40 135 0.229   FDU-Florham (NJ) NJAC 46 154 0.230               NAIA CONF W L Pct               Culver-Stockton (MO) HAAC 48 168 0.222   Mayville St (ND) NSAA 46 157 0.227   Montana St-Northern FC 57 153 0.271   SW Assemblies of God (TX) SAC 62 138 0.310   Central Methodist (MO) HAAC 68 145 0.319   Dakota St (SD) NSAA 66 138 0.324   Union (KY) MSC 69 141 0.329   Trinity International (IL) MSFA 71 144 0.330   Panhandle St (OK) SAC 70 139 0.335 Moved from D2 to NAIA in 2017 St Mary (KS) KCAC 69 134 0.340  
    • Best Winning Pct. over the past 20 seasons by Current Division. In order to qualify, team must have been active in 2000 and still competing in 2019.  NCAA D1 FBS (P5) CONF W L Pct               Ohio St BIG10 219 43 0.836 BCS Champs 2002; FBS Champs 2014 Oklahoma BIG12 219 49 0.817 BCS Champs 2000 LSU SEC 202 59 0.774 BCS Champs 2003, 2007; FBS Champs 2019 Alabama SEC 203 63 0.763 BCS Champs 2009, 2011, 2012; FBS Champs 2015, 2017 Georgia SEC 198 67 0.747   Clemson ACC 196 70 0.737 FBS Champs 2016, 2018 Oregon PAC12 188 70 0.729   Southern California PAC12 188 71 0.726 BCS Champs 2004 TCU BIG12 182 71 0.719 Moved up from G5 to P5 2012 Wisconsin BIG10 188 77 0.709               NCAA D1 FBS (G5) CONF W L Pct               Boise St MWC 219 43 0.836   Appalachian St SBC 192 69 0.736 FCS Champs 2005, 2006, 2007; moved from FCS to G5 in 2014 Georgia Southern SBC 161 90 0.641 FCS Champs 2000; moved up from FCS to G5 in 2014 Toledo MAC 158 92 0.632   Northern Illinois MAC 159 97 0.621   Brigham Young IND 158 97 0.620   Cincinnati AAC 157 97 0.618   UCF AAC 145 106 0.578   Marshall CUSA 145 107 0.575   Fresno St MWC 149 111 0.573               NCAA D1 FCS CONF W L Pct               North Dakota St MVFC 210 51 0.805 Moved from D2 to FCS 2004 - FCS Champs 2011-2015,2017-2019 Harvard IVY 150 49 0.754   Montana BSC 198 67 0.747 FCS Champ 2001 Dayton PL 162 59 0.733   San Diego PL 160 63 0.717   North Alabama BSo 162 73 0.689 Moved from D2 to FCS 2018 James Madison CAA 170 82 0.675 FCS Champs 2004, 2016 McNeese St SLC 155 76 0.671   Bethune-Cookman MEAC 151 75 0.668   Jacksonville St (AL) OVC 157 78 0.668               NCAA D2 CONF W L Pct               NW Missouri St MIAA 232 39 0.856 D2 Champs 2009, 2013, 2015, 2016 Grand Valley St (MI) GLIAC 217 41 0.841 D2 Champs 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006 Sioux Falls (SD) NSC 209 40 0.839 NAIA Champs 2006, 2008, 2009 -Moved from NAIA to D2 2011 Valdosta St (GA) GSC 192 47 0.803 D2 Champs 2004, 2007, 2012, 2018 Shepherd (WV) PSAC 177 49 0.783   Tuskegee (AL) SIAC 177 51 0.776   Minnesota-Duluth NSC 189 55 0.775 D2 Champions 2008, 2010 Indiana (PA) PSAC 169 57 0.748   Bloomsburg (PA) PSAC 173 60 0.742   Pittsburg St (KS) MIAA 177 64 0.734 D2 Champion 2011             NCAA D3 CONF W L Pct               Mount Union (OH) OAC 277 13 0.955 D3 Champs 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2012, 2015, 2017 Mary Hardin-Baylor (TX) ASC 230 27 0.895 D3 Champs 2016, 2018 Linfield (OR) NWC 187 32 0.854 D3 Champs 2004 UW-Whitewater (WI) WIAC 222 38 0.854 D3 Champs 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014 Trinity (CT) NESCAC 135 28 0.828   Wheaton (IL) CCIW 184 41 0.818   Wash & Jeff (PA) PAC 185 42 0.815   Wabash (IN) NCAC 179 41 0.814   St John's (MN) MIAC 195 45 0.813 D3 Champs 2003 Wesley (DE) NJAC 193 47 0.804               NAIA CONF W L Pct               St Francis (IN) MSFA 209 39 0.843 NAIA Champs 2016, 2017 Carroll (MT) FC 202 53 0.792 NAIA Champs 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2010 Morningside (IA) GPAC 185 50 0.787 NAIA Champs 2018, 2019 Georgetown (KY) MSC 176 54 0.765 NAIA Champs 2000, 2001 St Xavier (IN) MSFA 180 63 0.741 NAIA Champs 2011 Northwestern (IA) GPAC 158 60 0.725   MidAmerica Nazarene (KS) HAAC 165 63 0.724   Thomas More (KY) MSC 152 60 0.717 Moved from D3 to NAIA 2019 Benedictine (KS) HAAC 158 73 0.684   Cumberlands (KY) MSC 143 74 0.659  
    • So did Alabama and Auburn. ACC sucked this year and Clemson got exposed after quarter 1
    • They can't the closest maybe Plant or Venice cuz they are well coached teams
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...