Michigan vs. App State.

[downtown]

Is anybody else moving to D1A? I know Florida A&M was going to, then dropped out.

 

[ummmm........]

I'm not sure. I know most movement tends to be in the lower divisions, and one of the twenty teams is Birmingham-Southern, currently in the process of moving from I-A to III . . .

 

[Kraznaya]

Are you sure you're right about that ummmm.........? I've never heard of a Birmingham Southern in I-A, only UAB...

 

[NKVD]

i know football..well NFL and CFL and of course hockey... i dont understand the upset and how big is the difference between I-A and II-A because moments ago I didnt even know what was that. anyone can explain...well not explain but demonstrate to me how big is the difference between these 2 leagues.

 

[Kraznaya]

It's a pretty huge difference. Division I-A and Division I-AA teams are competing for different prizes at the end of the season- one for bowl games and the other for a minor playoff circuit that crowns a championship that no one cares about. To illustrate the point, App State got way more press for beating Michigan then for winning the last two Division I-AA titles (no one cares, pretty much).

A Division I-AA team has NEVER beat a ranked Division I-A team. Sometimes they'll beat a terrible I-A team that's on the edge of getting demoted anyway, but that's about it.

When a Division I-A team schedules a Division I-AA team, they're assuming that they're scheduling a free win. For example, Michigan had to pay App State $400,000 to come and take a beating- or at least they thought so.

 

[Azale]

A Division I-AA team has NEVER beat a ranked Division I-A team. Sometimes they'll beat a terrible I-A team that's on the edge of getting demoted anyway, but that's about it.

So when are Colorado and Stanford getting demoted?


Kraznaya is pretty much correct. This is huge. It's like a team of 10 year old Botswanans beating Canada in the Olympics. I don't think its ever snowed in Botswana either.

 

[Kraznaya]

Colorado was bringing in a new coach... there were a few articles during that time about Stanford demoting to I-AA to imitate Harvard and the Ivy League...

 

[NKVD]

ok...i'm guessing a win against a II-A team isnt worth much anyway? why would michigan wanted to play it (even if they would have win)?

 

[Azale]

Cupcake game, basically practice against opposing players. Or that was the plan anyway...

There is alot of criticism towards I-A teams who play I-AA teams, so it's even more sweet when they get burned for it.

 

[Kraznaya]

First off, it's I-AA. They play it for to generate experience for their starters to warm up for the next game, whatever that is, to sell tickets and make money, and to fill up the schedule.

 

[ummmm........]

Are you sure you're right about that ummmm.........? I've never heard of a Birmingham Southern in I-A, only UAB...

Okay, technically, since I-A and I-AA are purely football designations as Matt pointed out above, Birmingham-Southern was Division I, not I-A or I-AA. Since the only college sport I watch is football, I just said I-A out of habit. But yes, they initiated a move from NAIA to Division I in 1999 and then a move from I to III in 2006.

As to why I-A teams play I-AA teams, NKVD, it's a function of scheduling and economics.

Every I-A team except Hawaii is permitted twelve regular season games (Hawaii is permitted thirteen basically because they need an extra game to offset their god-awful travel expenses). For conference-affiliated schools -- that is, everyone except Notre Dame, Army, Navy and Western Kentucky -- the majority of those games are against conference opponents, half at home and half away, on average.

So that leaves most schools with around three or four non-conference games to try to make money on.

College football is separated into fairly well defined 'have' and 'have-not' groups.

Teams in the have group want as many home games as possible, since they regularly sell out and reap huge financial benefits for the athletic department (and surrounding community).

Teams from the have-not group typically do not sell out their (much smaller) stadiums and do not receive as much of a financial benefit from playing at home.

So if you're a 'have' school, like Michigan, you're faced with two options when it comes to filling your schedule.

First, you can play another 'have' school. The trouble with that is the other 'have' school will most likely demand a return visit. This is known as a 'home and home' series, where one year a school will come play on your field and the next year (or sometimes in a few years) you will go and play on their field. So you get a big financial benefit in the year they come to your place -- since it's a 'big' game and will attract more attention than a game with a 'have not' school, perhaps even including additional television revenue -- but you lose a home game -- and the attendant revenue -- in the follow-up year when you must visit that team.

The other option is to play a 'have not' school. A 'have not' will typically visit a 'have' for a guaranteed payday ($400,000 for Appalachian State at Michigan, as mentioned above). This works for both schools since the payout is less than the money the 'have' school would lose playing a home and home series with another have school, but more than the 'have not' school would make by playing at home. So it's a win-win for both schools, financially speaking. Also -- again, as mentioned above -- playing a 'have not' school gives a 'have' school a break from their more rigorous conference schedule.

Okay, once you've got all that figured out you've got to a) find a good 'have not' school to come to your place and b) have matching off weeks.

A 'good' 'have not' school means someone close to you geographically (lower travel expenses means lower payout) but not so close that it will hurt your recruiting if you don't beat them as you should. For example, Alabama typically plays 'have not' schools from Louisiana and Tennessee, states that are very close to Alabama but that they do not typically recruit heavily.

Finding such a team with a matching off week is practically an art form. That's why you'll often see a 'have' school playing the same 'have not' year after year; it's just too hard to find someone different to play.

So, short answer: Nobody wants to play a I-AA school, it's just that sometimes a I-AA school is simply all that's left.

 

[Kraznaya]

ummmm........

That's a pretty awesome (and detailed!) explanation-

But I wasn't aware that "have" schools give money out to "have-not" schools that are not I-AA. Could you clarify that a bit? Also, while its true that nobody exactly wants to play a I-AA school, but sometimes they'll rather schedule that than a home-and-home, which is a huge risk (that fans love).

 

[ummmm........]

You always have to pay someone who comes to you without a return trip. I don't have any proof of this on hand, but it's just the way things are done. Why would Kansas State give up a home game if Auburn wasn't paying? But I'm not saying that you can pay just anyone to come visit. Auburn was supposed to be gearing up for Louisville this week, but they were demanding a return trip to 42,000 seat Papa John's stadium. So instead USF's coming to town.

Most I-A programs are state schools so it shouldn't be hard to google the payouts if you're really interested . . .

EDIT: Either I'm a crappy googler, or this stuff is harder to find than I expected (probably the former). Here are a couple of articles that touch on it tangentially: Linky. Other linky.

EDIT EDIT: That second linky's actually pretty good. Here's the article the second article refers to, which includes some payouts at the very bottom (finally) Linky.

EDIT EDIT EDIT: Here we go. If you follow the link after the stuff in the last link, you go here. That list is interesting to me since it seems to indicate payouts even in home and home seires. They're always equal for both teams, so I guess that's just the penalty paid if you bail on your return trip commitment?

EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT: So Auburn paid the Citadel $600,000 to blow their shot at the national title game in '04

 

[Kraznaya]

Hahaha... Auburn also paid USC $500,000 to come and shut them out...

 

[ummmm........]

But they gave the money back the following year

EDIT: Misread that. Auburn was giving back the money USC paid the previous year . . .

 

[Kraznaya]

Argh never mind, apparently that was a tail end of a home and home - I didn't remember the first year of that... hmm, judging from that list, there doesn't seem to be as many home and homes as I thought there would be... also apparently out of conference rivalries don't do payouts (i.e. Notre Dame games)

 

[ummmm........]

There's no reason to believe that list is comprehensive.

 

[Kraznaya]

Now that you mention it, it probably isn't: I'm guessing its the ones that are public knowledge with those dates scattered all over the place: they simply put the ones they were sure about.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

Sigh......

 

[CamBot]

Scheduling the game was a bad decision all around, and they had nothing to gain.

If they had won, it still would have been a knock against them in the BCS at season's end. And if they had lost, well....

Plus, Michigan defense has trouble against Spread offenses like App. State.