Here's the FCS Bracket--The path we have

[RobertSebastianCat-81]

In response to the issue of the selection committee giving the Cats a tough road, and their response that geography was a key selection criteria, I was curious to see where the schools were located and their travel situation. I love a good graphic so this is my best shot. I think every year such a map should be provided. Here is the link that I hope works: I tried to provide a PDF, but am challenged to figure out how to share.

Edit by kmax: Fixed image

[onceacat]

It looks like NDSU will have the tour De Big Sky. Likely um in the 2nd and maybe Idaho in the qtrs followed by Sac. Maybe one of them could get the job done.

On the one hand, someone posted a while back that NDSU hasn't played a road playoff game since Bozeman about 12 years ago.

On the other hand, Sac has wet the bed in the playoffs after great seasons twice in a row.

I think if Sac gets their playoff mojo going, they've got a decent shot at beating NDSU...but I can't imagine Idaho or UM doing that in Fargo.

And that’s what continues to chap my @ss; we should have the 3 seed and NDSU the 4, all so they’d have to play a road game. Instead, the committee gifted them. So frustrating.

Wat? 3 and 4 seeds do both have to travel for the semis, unless the 1 or 2 seeds stumble… unless I’m misunderstanding.

I think he's trying to say that SDSU has a really easy bracket and is unlikely to lose before the semis, while Sac has a tougher one and a history of being upset early. So the #3 seed has a much higher chance of getting to host the semi this year than #4.

Well, SDSU as the #1 seed SHOULD have the easiest bracket. Honestly, I think MSU has the 2nd easiest...I'd certainly rather face the CAA champs in the QF than UIW or Samford.

Other than Sacs history of blowing playoff games, I don't really see how their bracket is any weaker than NDSUs. NDSU needs to play Idaho/SELA/Samford, none of which IMO is any easier than Sacs matchup with UIW.

I really can't see how MSU getting in the #3 bracket with Idaho, UM, & Samford is a better path to the chipper than we currently have. The #4 pod is far and away the best landing spot for MSU, at least until the SF...and I'd always rather play an OOC game than a conference game against Sac...Sac is something like 23-1 against the BSC in the last 3 years.

So IMO the committee did a massive favor to MSU by keeping us & Sac on opposite sides of the bracket.

[91catAlum]

It looks like NDSU will have the tour De Big Sky. Likely um in the 2nd and maybe Idaho in the qtrs followed by Sac. Maybe one of them could get the job done.

On the one hand, someone posted a while back that NDSU hasn't played a road playoff game since Bozeman about 12 years ago.

On the other hand, Sac has wet the bed in the playoffs after great seasons twice in a row.

I think if Sac gets their playoff mojo going, they've got a decent shot at beating NDSU...but I can't imagine Idaho or UM doing that in Fargo.

And that’s what continues to chap my @ss; we should have the 3 seed and NDSU the 4, all so they’d have to play a road game. Instead, the committee gifted them. So frustrating.

Wat? 3 and 4 seeds do both have to travel for the semis, unless the 1 or 2 seeds stumble… unless I’m misunderstanding.

I think he's trying to say that SDSU has a really easy bracket and is unlikely to lose before the semis, while Sac has a tougher one and a history of being upset early. So the #3 seed has a much higher chance of getting to host the semi this year than #4.

Well, SDSU as the #1 seed SHOULD have the easiest bracket. Honestly, I think MSU has the 2nd easiest...I'd certainly rather face the CAA champs in the QF than UIW or Samford.

Other than Sacs history of blowing playoff games, I don't really see how their bracket is any weaker than NDSUs. NDSU needs to play Idaho/SELA/Samford, none of which IMO is any easier than Sacs matchup with UIW.

I really can't see how MSU getting in the #3 bracket with Idaho, UM, & Samford is a better path to the chipper than we currently have. The #4 pod is far and away the best landing spot for MSU, at least until the SF...and I'd always rather play an OOC game than a conference game against Sac...Sac is something like 23-1 against the BSC in the last 3 years.

So IMO the committee did a massive favor to MSU by keeping us & Sac on opposite sides of the bracket.

Ya, I disagree. Having to play the #9 team, who should've been 7 or 8, in our first game is the toughest 2nd round game for any of the 8 seeded teams.

Weber got hosed and so did MSU.

[rivercat]

In response to the issue of the selection committee giving the Cats a tough road, and their response that geography was a key selection criteria, I was curious to see where the schools were located and their travel situation. I love a good graphic so this is my best shot. I think every year such a map should be provided. Here is the link that I hope works: I tried to provide a PDF, but am challenged to figure out how to share.

Edit by kmax: Fixed image

Nice first post. Your graphic shows regionalization is relevant only on the east coast. The NCAA saves some money by bussing east coast teams to host sites at the expense of bracketing teams based on ranking.

[Prodigal Cat]

It looks like NDSU will have the tour De Big Sky. Likely um in the 2nd and maybe Idaho in the qtrs followed by Sac. Maybe one of them could get the job done.

On the one hand, someone posted a while back that NDSU hasn't played a road playoff game since Bozeman about 12 years ago.

On the other hand, Sac has wet the bed in the playoffs after great seasons twice in a row.

I think if Sac gets their playoff mojo going, they've got a decent shot at beating NDSU...but I can't imagine Idaho or UM doing that in Fargo.

Not 100% correct. I see why we as Cat fans dismiss it but the Bison lost on the road in the spring playoffs in 2021 to Sam Houston. They are 1-2 in the playoffs away from Fargo. 2010 they beat the Cats then lost in a classic at EWU.

[onceacat]

It looks like NDSU will have the tour De Big Sky. Likely um in the 2nd and maybe Idaho in the qtrs followed by Sac. Maybe one of them could get the job done.

On the one hand, someone posted a while back that NDSU hasn't played a road playoff game since Bozeman about 12 years ago.

On the other hand, Sac has wet the bed in the playoffs after great seasons twice in a row.

I think if Sac gets their playoff mojo going, they've got a decent shot at beating NDSU...but I can't imagine Idaho or UM doing that in Fargo.

And that’s what continues to chap my @ss; we should have the 3 seed and NDSU the 4, all so they’d have to play a road game. Instead, the committee gifted them. So frustrating.

Wat? 3 and 4 seeds do both have to travel for the semis, unless the 1 or 2 seeds stumble… unless I’m misunderstanding.

I think he's trying to say that SDSU has a really easy bracket and is unlikely to lose before the semis, while Sac has a tougher one and a history of being upset early. So the #3 seed has a much higher chance of getting to host the semi this year than #4.

Well, SDSU as the #1 seed SHOULD have the easiest bracket. Honestly, I think MSU has the 2nd easiest...I'd certainly rather face the CAA champs in the QF than UIW or Samford.

Other than Sacs history of blowing playoff games, I don't really see how their bracket is any weaker than NDSUs. NDSU needs to play Idaho/SELA/Samford, none of which IMO is any easier than Sacs matchup with UIW.

I really can't see how MSU getting in the #3 bracket with Idaho, UM, & Samford is a better path to the chipper than we currently have. The #4 pod is far and away the best landing spot for MSU, at least until the SF...and I'd always rather play an OOC game than a conference game against Sac...Sac is something like 23-1 against the BSC in the last 3 years.

So IMO the committee did a massive favor to MSU by keeping us & Sac on opposite sides of the bracket.

Ya, I disagree. Having to play the #9 team, who should've been 7 or 8, in our first game is the toughest 2nd round game for any of the 8 seeded teams.

Weber got hosed and so did MSU.

I think the entire BSC got a bit disrespected...I think Sac should have been 1, MSU 3, and Weber #8 or so. Davis should have been in over Delaware. The BSC was head & shoulders better than any other conference this year & should have had 6 teams, which the CAA was really weak without JMU & should have had 3 invites.

But the Weber matchup is part of regionalization...so it was pretty much a given that no matter what either Idaho or Weber was coming to Bozeman for round 2. I would have liked Idaho because we haven't played yet, but I don't think Idaho is that much weaker than Weber to really make a material difference.

That said, W&M is WAY overseeded considering how weak the CAA was this year, so getting them at home in the QF is enough of a gift that it mostly balances out the Weber snub. And given that Sac State is 23-1 against the BSC in the last 3 years, I'd still rather go to Brookings than Sacremento even given Sacs history of playoff meltdowns.