Started By
Message
1
Posted on 8/7/16 at 1:45 am to TigerChief10
back when there were ties, it was often that a 7-4-1 team didn't go bowling. Usually the exception was an SEC team. SEC squads went bowling year after year it seemed. I don't believe they had rules in place for squads to not bowl every year.
Anywho... I am fine with 7-5 teams bowling. At least when those teams lose, the record will still be above .500.
The only time I think a 6-7 team can bowl is if it loses in the conference title game because it being an extra game. Otherwise, 7-5 and higher should be the standard rule.
Anywho... I am fine with 7-5 teams bowling. At least when those teams lose, the record will still be above .500.
The only time I think a 6-7 team can bowl is if it loses in the conference title game because it being an extra game. Otherwise, 7-5 and higher should be the standard rule.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 6:53 am to Oklahomey
Yes
Tennessee needs those teams so they can win handily and win the offseason every year
Tennessee needs those teams so they can win handily and win the offseason every year
Posted on 8/7/16 at 8:17 am to UFFan
I only watch ole miss so idc.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 8:53 am to UFFan
1965: AU was 5-4-1 Liberty Bowl
1973: AU 6-5 sun bowl
Bowls also used to be about off field politics and which teams were willing to go. In 1964 and 1978 AU turned down bowls.
Now you would be stupid to not sign up for extra practice.
1973: AU 6-5 sun bowl
Bowls also used to be about off field politics and which teams were willing to go. In 1964 and 1978 AU turned down bowls.
Now you would be stupid to not sign up for extra practice.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 8:54 am to Oklahomey
What are you talking about? So, one tie kept them out of a bowl? I can probably name 50 teams from the 80's and 90's with a tie that went bowling. Also, the record wouldn't have been 7-4-1 since there were only 11 regular season games then, unless you played in a kickoff classic. Most teams that finished 6-4--1 or 7-3-1 went bowling. In fact, your Sooners were 6-4-1 in 1981 and went to the Sun Bowl to play 7-3-1 Houston. Facts, they'll get you every time.
This post was edited on 8/7/16 at 8:58 am
Posted on 8/7/16 at 10:47 am to gladchiefisgone
No, but what do u do with so many bowls. The problem isn't teams records, it's thirty something bowls. It means literally nothing to go to a bowl now unless it's the cfp. 30 years ago it was hard to get to a bowl with an 8-4 record. Now 8-4 gets u a florida bowl. 
Posted on 8/7/16 at 10:49 am to UFFan
I root for bama. Haven't cared in a decade.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 1:50 pm to UFFan
No, winning seasons only.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 1:58 pm to TouchdownTony
quote:
No, but what do u do with so many bowls
What do you even mean by "what do you do" with them? You watch them, or you don't. That's all there is to it. It doesn't detract from the legitimacy of bowl games at all because people still know who the better teams are based on record and who they played. I usually don't watch lower tier bowl games unless there's an SEC team playing. I don't care about 6-6 or 5-7 teams playing in bowl games because it doesn't take away from my enjoyment of watching the better bowl games at all.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 3:28 pm to UFFan
Hell no. You should win 7 games before you are considered for a reward like that. Bowl season used to mean something but now that the playoffs are here it is a joke and watered down.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 3:48 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
The ratings give them enough stroke for the networks to make money.
No it doesn't. Most of the games with the bad, small orwell, I'll say it again...bad teams were not on the networks. They were on small regional or off shoot stations. ESPN3, CBSSN, and run on ESPN at noon and 3:30 on a weekday. Why? because nobody wants to see them.
Tell me something. Would you watch Western Kentucky play San Jose State during the season> Do you stay up for Hawaii vs. Cornell on Saturday nights at 11PM?
If not, why would you bother for a bowl game that means nothing? The only reason to watch is for an intriguing matchup, or a team you are at least mildly interested in. I didn't watch Arkansas vs. UTEP, either.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 3:50 pm to The_Joker
quote:
Yes...
You are a better man than I am, then.
quote:
Must have been rough being forced to watch football.
Nobody forced me. That's why I didn't watch those games. I would rather watch the local High School team play, and they weren't very good and had no major players on the team.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 7:10 pm to DawgsLife
Bowls suck anyways. Anybody who pines for those glorified meaningless exhibition games probably still use rotary phones and miss the days of segregation as some sort of tradition
In a sport where there are 100 teams and only 10-12 games we need real playoffs and champions decided by actually playing each other
College football has been acting like gymnastics for too damn long when winners are decided by judging. Might as well put a bunch of leotards on the players and have them just do combines
frick the bowls and frick the polls
In a sport where there are 100 teams and only 10-12 games we need real playoffs and champions decided by actually playing each other
College football has been acting like gymnastics for too damn long when winners are decided by judging. Might as well put a bunch of leotards on the players and have them just do combines
frick the bowls and frick the polls
Posted on 8/7/16 at 7:54 pm to UFFan
quote:
Should 6-6 teams be allowed to go to bowls?
No
Posted on 8/7/16 at 7:56 pm to MeatPants
quote:
In a sport where there are 100 teams and only 10-12 games we need real playoffs and champions decided by actually playing each other
College football has been acting like gymnastics for too damn long when winners are decided by judging. Might as well put a bunch of leotards on the players and have them just do combines
Understand what you are saying, but rarely is a year that there could be more than 4 teams so close it's not obvious who is better.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 8:51 pm to DawgsLife
That's just dead wrong. For example the year notre dame played Alabama. There were probably better teams. And for sure as god damn hell some other teams deserved a chance than the 2011 suckfest national title game.
History would be a helluva lot different if there were playoffs and not beauty contests
Even though bamA fans do remind me of honey boo boo
History would be a helluva lot different if there were playoffs and not beauty contests
Even though bamA fans do remind me of honey boo boo
Posted on 8/7/16 at 9:56 pm to OBReb6
Obreb6 , you do realize ole miss has sent more 6 win teams bowling than msu has right?
Posted on 8/7/16 at 10:12 pm to Porcine Human
quote:
People are so caught up in whether or not a team is "deserving" that they forget there are actual people playing these games and that extra bowl games allow them to continue living their dream. It's ridiculous that people want to take that away from them.
Posted on 8/7/16 at 10:26 pm to UFFan
Major college football has been held hostage by the bowls for all of its modern existence. There should be no bowls at all.
A 32-team playoff would provide 31 games that mean something. We currently have 38 bowls that mean absolutely nothing. Only the 3 CFP games are worth watching.
A 32-team playoff would provide 31 games that mean something. We currently have 38 bowls that mean absolutely nothing. Only the 3 CFP games are worth watching.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News