The current FCS playoff structure is nearing 10 years of existence since the field expanded in 2013 — 24 teams, eight seeds, the bidding process to host for unseeded teams, regionalization, splitting ticket revenue with the NCAA, etc.
Notable changes to the playoff model have been discussed by conference commissioners over the last year. One of the changes most widely known by the public is expanding the field. Big Sky Commissioner Tom Wistrcill, who has led the charge on expansion, told HERO Sports last week on the FCS Football Talk podcast that conversations of adding four more teams to the bracket are ongoing. He also mentioned some commissioners have brought different models to the table, such as seeding the top 16 teams in the field.
However, due to the regionalization of most NCAA-sponsored championships, Wistrcill believes it would be a tough sell to the NCAA to seed that many teams since it would stray away from its regionalized model. So his main focus for FCS playoff changes is expansion to happen for the 2023 season. Wistrcill also wants to bring other big-picture topics to the table in the near future to continue improving the postseason.
Why would the playoffs need to expand?
For some, it doesn’t.
A number of fans and FCS media have opined the bracket has already gotten watered down over the last decade with noteworthy programs leaving the FCS for the FBS, and adding more teams would water it down more.
Wistrcill believes the opposite.
With support from Missouri Valley Football Conference/Pioneer Football League Commissioner Patty Viverito and Colonial Athletic Association Commissioner Joe D’Antonio, Wistrcill said a recent increase in conference auto-bids means more at-large bids should be added to the field to strengthen it.
“I think it puts tremendous damage into the playoffs and too many good teams are left out,” Wistrcill said. “I don’t want to lose those at-large spots that are available to the teams and conferences that invest greatly into FCS football. … Any creep above 50 percent for the AQs is damaging.”
The Big Sky, CAA, and MVFC are considered (by most) as the three best in the FCS. They have grabbed a majority of the at-large bids in recent years. The three leagues took 10 of the 13 at-large bids in 2021 — MVFC 5, Big Sky 4, CAA 1. In 2019, they had eight of the 14 at-large bids (MVFC 3, Big Sky 3, CAA 2). And in 2018, it had 10 of the 14 at-large spots (CAA 5, Big Sky 3, MVFC 2).
When the ASUN and WAC announced new FCS football-playing conferences at the start of 2021, that meant two more auto-bids and two fewer at-large bids. Which also means a worse chance for a fourth or fifth-place team from one of the stronger conferences to get in. There are several past examples of the fifth-place Big Sky or MVFC team being ranked higher in the national polls than multiple conference champions/auto-bids.
From 2013 to 2019, the FCS bracket featured 10 conference auto-bids and 14 at-large bids. The ASUN and WAC formed a one-year joint conference called the AQ7, and the 2021 fall season had 11 auto-bids to 13 at-larges. This year, it will be split 12 and 12 as the ASUN and WAC have their own auto-bids. In 2023, it is expected to be back down to 11 auto-bids with the Big South and OVC combining to form a football association.
What would the new bracket look like?
When reports came out in 2021 of a push for playoff expansion, the original number of teams was 32 with no first-round byes. That has since changed to 28 teams.
Wistrcill said in his model, there would still be eight seeds. The top four seeds would get a first-round bye, and seeds 5-8 would have a guaranteed home game in the first round. The calendar would remain the same, as would other elements of the playoffs, like the regionalization/bidding process/etc.
Could there be more seeded teams?
FCS commissioners talked about FCS playoff changes as recently as a few weeks ago. According to Wistrcill, no commissioner is against expanding the playoffs by four teams. The feedback has ranged from “Yeah, I am for it” to “Yeah, let’s talk about it, it’s a good discussion” to “Hey, let’s look at this other model too.”
That other model is seeding the top 16 teams in the bracket, whether it’s a 24-team bracket or a 28-team bracket.
“While I think that’s a great idea. I just don’t think the NCAA would go for that,” Wistrcill said. “Purely because regionalization is a part of the NCAA championship structure. And that’s not going to go away in softball and soccer and volleyball and other sports. We can’t ask them to just carve it out for FCS football and get rid of the regionalization concept. I think we’d be wasting our time fighting that battle. I would rather fight the battle for four more teams to get in so that we protect the integrity of the tournament by not having more than 50 percent of the field as AQs.”
Wistrcill also noted it isn’t an either/or scenario. The field can both expand and include more than eight seeds. He just sees a bigger challenge in increasing the number of seeds compared to expanding the field by four. Ultimately, the commissioners need to be in unison on what they want if/when they look to take the next steps for approval.
How does this process work for final approval?
It’s quite the process to get approval for changes to NCAA championships. Any changes to the FCS playoffs won’t happen for the 2022 season, Wistrcill said. He is pushing for it to happen for 2023, although the ongoing NCAA constitutional transformation could slow down an already multi-step process.
FCS commissioners would need to be on board with any proposed changes. The changes would first go to the football oversight committee. It would then go into the championship structure and the championship oversight committee. And then ultimately it would go to the NCAA Council for final approval.
What other postseason improvements are commissioners looking at?
Wistrcill said he doesn’t envision any other significant changes to the playoff structure outside of possible expansion. But he did say conversations about other aspects will be brought up in the future. Such as broadcasting rights and the championship game venue. Not necessarily that changes will for sure happen in those two avenues, but it’s the duty of the commissioners to look ahead at all options to continue growing the FCS brand.
Any changes would be a few years down the road.
In 2019, the NCAA and Frisco, Texas, extended the contract to have the FCS title game held at Toyota Stadium through the 2024 season with an option for the 2025 season. Frisco has been the host since the 2010 season. Complaints of the playing surface have been voiced by fans for several years. Wistrcill discussed that topic on the podcast and said the commissioners and playoff committee are fully aware it is an issue, and it is being addressed.
The NCAA’s current agreement with ESPN to broadcast the FCS playoffs runs through the 2023 season. These extended broadcasting rights were announced back in December of 2011.
Wistrcill wants to find a way to get as many playoff games on linear TV as possible. Typically, the FCS postseason gets two quarterfinal games, both semifinal games, and the championship game on national television like ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, and sometimes ABC. The others are streamed on ESPN platforms. But Wistrcill pointed out that last season’s second-round rivalry game of Eastern Washington at Montana in front of a raucous environment was worthy of a spot on ESPN2 or ESPNU.
“Live sports capture a tremendous amount of attention within the media world,” Wistrcill said. “We need to look at what can we do. Do we have the right broadcast partner? Or what do we need to do, where do we need to look? Where are our opportunities to take our product to new and exciting places? Then we look championship environment. We have a tournament that leads to a championship. Should we always be in Frisco? Should we move this around? Should we play in LA one year? Should we play in Orlando? Should we play in a dome in Indianapolis? Those are the things that as we look out, we need to start to take a really hard look at ourselves and where we want to go. Let’s see what’s out there. As I look into the future, those are the things that we can do to build on what is already great. We can make it even better.”
“I think that’s our responsibility as the leaders within FCS to look at all of those different options,” he added. “It doesn’t mean we’re going to change. We might be in Frisco for 20 more years and it might be on ESPN. But we have the obligation and that’s our job is to take a hard look at all of this and say ‘Are we doing the right thing for the betterment of FCS football?’ as we look into the future and look at all of the options. Things are changing so rapidly from a media standpoint that who knows what’s going to be out there in the future. So you never close the door on those things. Always take a hard look at it, whether it’s for your own conference or for the national championship. There will be a time for us to do that. It’s not time right now in March of 2022. But nonetheless, we’ll address those things as we go along.”
The full interview with Wistrcill can be heard below. You can also find the podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeart, Stitcher, and Spreaker.
SUBSCRIBE: FCS Football Talk
