The “win” over Mercer would have been paying big dividends at this point.

So lame, not getting the Mercer result...like Plough said, if it doesn't count towards our Playoff push, no stats recorded, why should it count towards a player's eligibility? The only reason I can think of is that the 4 game exposure cutoff is directly related to in-game experience, and while the game didn't count it was 3.5 quarters of game time regardless - just seems cheap if there's no meaningful result.

On the other hand, had we lost, we would 100% need to win the Sac game to get in. I know we were winning in the 4th quarter, but it's not like we were up 21 when the game got stopped.

I think the Mercer game taught them a lot. It's not a sure thing they win that game since Mercer was driving and had been unstoppable. They lost to Montana State, the #2 team and still dropped 6 slots.

If they win vs Sac State they should be in line for a first round game at home (too bad a lot of students will be away). With how much they dropped, they probably lost their chance for a Bye without a lot of luck. A loss to Sac and they are either out or like the very last one in.

My opinion: Davis is already in. This Causeway is just like 2023, but in reverse (if Davis loses).

Committee can't let themselves leave a season-long ranked team (top 10 for nearly all of it) out over an unranked team.

Sac had a better resume than we did in 2023.

Using the STATS poll after the regular season ended...

Sac lost at No. 4 Idaho by 9, at home to No. 5 Montana St by 12, at No. 2 Montana by 27, at No. 25 UC Davis by 10. They won at 6-5 Nichols by 14 (playoff team by winning their conference) and at Stanford.

UC Davis lost at Oregon St, at home to 4-7 Eastern Washington by 3, at home to No. 2 Montana by 8 and at 5-6 Northern Arizona by 17. Won at 6-5 Weber St by 1, home to 6-5 Southern Utah by 2, and home to No. 15 Sac by 10.

We got burned that year because we lost to EWU and NAU. I get we had the H2H win, and that certainly counts for something. Both teams had 1 good win, we had 2 other wins over +.500 teams while they had one but we had two losses to sub .500 teams and they had none.

The year we actually got screwed over was 2022. Went 6-5 but lost to FBS, No. 1 by 2 points on the road, No. 2 by 6 points on the road, No. 3 by 17 on the road and No. 9 by 5 at home. We won at Idaho by 18 but they get picked over us. Deserved to be picked over Montana that year also.

Fairly certain they’re in regardless of this week, playing for a first round home game

Dropping 6 spots losing to the #2 is a joke. We should have moved one spot at most.

Do we have any other examples of the drops of any other schools losing to one of the top 4 programs?

We are always battling Midwest and East Coast bias...and maybe Montana bias as well -- Aggies are the biggest wrench to the Montana machine in the Big Sky right now, and we have plans to move to FBS while these schools look to continue dominating the FCS, I imagine that isn't looked at favorably by the Committee. The two picks in the 2nd half performance were not worthy of a Top 12 team, Pinnick has to be sharper and more consistency is needed. Honestly, I think the Committee pushed Davis down because they see them beating Sac, and it gives a chance for other mid-tier teams to get better positioned going into the final week.

Plough will have the guys firing on all cylinders this Saturday - question is if this team, which has shown some discipline issues at times, will keep their composure when Marion and his Hornets start jawing at them.

Give us a crack at #6-#13, anytime, any place.

The '22 neglect made '23 a snub. 2 years in-a-row Davis belonged. This year I still think we are already in. Committee loves their ranked teams.

Yeah, I would love to see what we'd do vs. better ranked teams like TTU, Lehigh, Harvard, Rhode Island, Monmouth, SFA. Playoffs are always fun because fans get to really see the differences between the conferences.

I'm sure most voters just saw we lost by 3 TDs and assumed it was an easy MSU victory.

The Committee doesn't vote the rankings published this week.
There are a bunch of two loss teams, and voters are swayed by record. I think all the publicity about injuries is swaying voters.

You may have a point about the injury thing. On top of that, the Mercer situation isn't sexy.

What is sexy is how well Davis played in that game and how good Mercer is currently looking - while it doesn't count, it's still a solid showing on national tv.

Also true.

Honestly, I feel like we’d be the team that absolutely no one would want to play in the playoffs. Ndsu is a different monster but if we somehow ended up in the other bracket, I like our chances at a deep run. We played with Montana State and two plays made a difference, it wasn’t an ass kicking. We just have to win and get invited to the dance.

So true. Outside of MVFC and BigSky, it seems to drop off quick

We had the Connors for Mercer.

Yeah, maybe, but we also had a RFr. QB in his first collegiate start ever.

I agree, and I feel TTU and SFA would be the tougher outs for UCD on your list. Lehigh and URI are sometimes solid, Harvard is a lower-third Big Sky team at best, and Monmouth is questionable. Nothing better than playoff season aside from winning the Causeway and Horseshoe in the same year!

Mercer... yes please!

Is their an East Coast/Midwest bias against the Big Sky? It doesn't feel that way to me when there are so many BSC teams in the dance every year.

One interesting aspect is that the playoffs make the entire roster available, right? Anyone lurking on the redshirt list that will help, either on special teams or as situational players? We're already playing freshmen at Corner, DE, WR, and we have a nice group of current redshirt FR playing (CP, Seivers, and others). Making the playoffs only makes the young players better due to more time on the field, sort of like bowl practices in FBS.

I think there's a bias, and I think that's only natural given the FCS Landscape:



Also, I'm making the note, but there isn't a single FCS team in the States of Wyoming, New Mexico, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Michigan or Wisconsin?

17? Nah.