Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
Author Message
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #21
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-23-2014 09:50 PM)HHOOTter Wrote:  
(11-23-2014 06:47 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  Have you seen their OOC schedules? All they need to do is win 3 conference games and they're in. The SEC's been playing this game forever.

EXACTLY!!!!!!

Well, let's look at it team-by-team
West
Alabama beat West Virginia
Auburn beat K-State
Arkansas beat Texas Tech
LSU beat Wisconsin
Ole Miss beat Boise State
Mississippi State didn't play anybody good (Southern Miss used to be good...)
Texas A&M did not play anybody good, and didn't plan to. (Rice, SMU, ULM)
East
Georgia played Clemson, plays GT
South Carolina plays Clemson, plays ECU
Kentucky plays Louisville
Florida plays FSU
Tennessee played Oklahoma
Missouri played UCF and Indiana--say what you want about Indiana, but they beat Missouri
Vanderbilt played Temple. On the one hand, Temple is the least impressive opponent on the list. On the other hand, they beat Vanderbilt.

So 10 out of 14 SEC teams play/played a decent P5 team or Boise State. If you count Mizzou playing Indiana, 11 out of 14.
11-23-2014 10:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrojanCampaign Online
All American
*

Posts: 4,692
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 170
I Root For: USC, AAMU,
Location: Huntsville
Post: #22
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
I really do not see any SEC teams I would question going to a bowl game if they are 6-6 or better.

It may be easy for one to say that someone like Kentucky has played no one in OOC but using that logic why do these no one's deserve to go bowling when all they play is no one?

Kentucky despite who they play in OOC still have to play multiple ranked teams. Not to mention many SEC schools have an ACC rival they play every year.
11-24-2014 05:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chargeradio Offline
Vamos Morados
*

Posts: 7,466
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 121
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #23
SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
Kentucky has to beat Louisville to become bowl eligible, which would actually be their best win on the season. If Kentucky and Tennessee win, that gives the SEC 13 teams-that may be an issue given the number of tie-ins:

Sugar (Playoff) - Alabama
Orange - Mississippi State
Cap One - Georgia
Outback - Missouri
Gator - Mississippi
Liberty - Auburn
Texas - Texas A&M
Belk - Florida
Birmingham - LSU
Independence - Arkansas
Music City - Tennessee

That would leave South Carolina and Kentucky for the at-large pool.
11-24-2014 06:17 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,558
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 180
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #24
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
I would be shocked if the SEC doesn't get three Bama, MSU and (UGA or Missouri)
11-24-2014 06:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #25
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 05:45 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I really do not see any SEC teams I would question going to a bowl game if they are 6-6 or better.

It may be easy for one to say that someone like Kentucky has played no one in OOC but using that logic why do these no one's deserve to go bowling when all they play is no one?

Kentucky despite who they play in OOC still have to play multiple ranked teams. Not to mention many SEC schools have an ACC rival they play every year.

Kentucky has to beat Louisville to get to 6-6.
11-24-2014 06:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Maize Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,340
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 555
I Root For: Athletes First
Location:
Post: #26
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 06:41 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 05:45 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I really do not see any SEC teams I would question going to a bowl game if they are 6-6 or better.

It may be easy for one to say that someone like Kentucky has played no one in OOC but using that logic why do these no one's deserve to go bowling when all they play is no one?

Kentucky despite who they play in OOC still have to play multiple ranked teams. Not to mention many SEC schools have an ACC rival they play every year.

Kentucky has to beat Louisville to get to 6-6.

That ain't happening...they can't stop the run and Michael Dyer is licking his chops....05-mafia
11-24-2014 09:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullitt_60 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,666
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 69
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location: Atlanta, GA
Post: #27
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-23-2014 06:07 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Obviously we need several more bowl games! 02-13-banana

We need to raise bowl eligibility to 7 games as it should have been done when the 12th game was added.
11-24-2014 10:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,009
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 657
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #28
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 10:28 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  
(11-23-2014 06:07 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Obviously we need several more bowl games! 02-13-banana

We need to raise bowl eligibility to 7 games as it should have been done when the 12th game was added.

+1
11-24-2014 11:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WakeForestRanger Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,740
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 92
I Root For: Wake Forest
Location:
Post: #29
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 10:28 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  
(11-23-2014 06:07 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Obviously we need several more bowl games! 02-13-banana

We need to raise bowl eligibility to 7 games as it should have been done when the 12th game was added.

I think you're missing the point of bowl games.
11-24-2014 11:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #30
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 11:47 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 10:28 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  
(11-23-2014 06:07 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Obviously we need several more bowl games! 02-13-banana

We need to raise bowl eligibility to 7 games as it should have been done when the 12th game was added.

I think you're missing the point of bowl games.
he's missing the point of what the bowl games have become. He's 100% to the point of what the bowl games used to be.
11-24-2014 11:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #31
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 10:28 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  
(11-23-2014 06:07 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Obviously we need several more bowl games! 02-13-banana

We need to raise bowl eligibility to 7 games as it should have been done when the 12th game was added.

That means this year you would have to eliminate seven P5 bowls and one G5 bowl for lack of teams available. Which ones would you eliminate?

Or, would you allow those bowls to invite 6-6 teams instead?
11-24-2014 12:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dbackjon Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,009
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 657
I Root For: NAU/Illini
Location:
Post: #32
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 12:16 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 10:28 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  
(11-23-2014 06:07 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Obviously we need several more bowl games! 02-13-banana

We need to raise bowl eligibility to 7 games as it should have been done when the 12th game was added.

That means this year you would have to eliminate seven P5 bowls and one G5 bowl for lack of teams available. Which ones would you eliminate?

Or, would you allow those bowls to invite 6-6 teams instead?

Let's just add a 13th game at the end of the season. We'd only need another 26 bowls. Since 2/3 of FBS teams go to bowls, might as well let everyone in on the "Fun"
11-24-2014 01:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Offline
The Black Knight of The Deplorables

Posts: 9,618
Joined: Oct 2013
I Root For: Army, SFU
Location: Michie Stadium 1945
Post: #33
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 11:49 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 11:47 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 10:28 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  
(11-23-2014 06:07 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Obviously we need several more bowl games! 02-13-banana

We need to raise bowl eligibility to 7 games as it should have been done when the 12th game was added.

I think you're missing the point of bowl games.
he's missing the point of what the bowl games have become. He's 100% to the point of what the bowl games used to be.

Bowl games have only been about making money, not the best matchups or what team deserved to be there. The Rose Bowl was started to sell real estate.

1984 BYU (National Champions) played 6-6 Michigan.

Conference tie-ins prevented PSU from playing Nebraska in 1994.

There are plenty of examples. Bowl games are about money. Always have been, always will be.
11-24-2014 05:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Offline
The Black Knight of The Deplorables

Posts: 9,618
Joined: Oct 2013
I Root For: Army, SFU
Location: Michie Stadium 1945
Post: #34
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-23-2014 09:07 AM)TStatebobcat Wrote:  
(11-23-2014 08:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  The entire SEC West is bowl eligible and four SEC East teams are as well.

And it could be as many as 13, if Tennessee beats Vandy (very likely) and Kentucky beats Louisville (unlikely) next week.

So the SEC probably finishes with 12 bowl eligible teams.

Any schools from smaller conferences hoping the SEC wouldn't fill all its bowl slots, well, stop hoping, LOL.

Its not just filling all its slots, they may well send teams to other bowls not affiliated with the SEC. Its a nightmare scenario for my bobcats. We might well stay home with a 7-5 record.

Yup. Some teams are going to be robbed. It should be based on record to fill the extra slots.
11-24-2014 05:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #35
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 05:33 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 11:49 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 11:47 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 10:28 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  
(11-23-2014 06:07 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  Obviously we need several more bowl games! 02-13-banana

We need to raise bowl eligibility to 7 games as it should have been done when the 12th game was added.

I think you're missing the point of bowl games.
he's missing the point of what the bowl games have become. He's 100% to the point of what the bowl games used to be.

Bowl games have only been about making money, not the best matchups or what team deserved to be there. The Rose Bowl was started to sell real estate.

1984 BYU (National Champions) played 6-6 Michigan.

Conference tie-ins prevented PSU from playing Nebraska in 1994.

There are plenty of examples. Bowl games are about money. Always have been, always will be.

The fans have spoken, as evidenced in ESPN's bowl game ratings. A bowl game between two 6-6 teams draws really good ratings compared to anything else ESPN might air in the same time slot, and the cost to ESPN is relatively low.

Doesn't matter whether you or I think that 6-6 teams should be in bowl games. The only way those games are going to go away any time soon is if the ratings sink below the level of SportsCenter re-runs or nightly studio shows.
11-24-2014 05:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Offline
The Black Knight of The Deplorables

Posts: 9,618
Joined: Oct 2013
I Root For: Army, SFU
Location: Michie Stadium 1945
Post: #36
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 05:50 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 05:33 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 11:49 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 11:47 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 10:28 AM)bullitt_60 Wrote:  We need to raise bowl eligibility to 7 games as it should have been done when the 12th game was added.

I think you're missing the point of bowl games.
he's missing the point of what the bowl games have become. He's 100% to the point of what the bowl games used to be.

Bowl games have only been about making money, not the best matchups or what team deserved to be there. The Rose Bowl was started to sell real estate.

1984 BYU (National Champions) played 6-6 Michigan.

Conference tie-ins prevented PSU from playing Nebraska in 1994.

There are plenty of examples. Bowl games are about money. Always have been, always will be.

The fans have spoken, as evidenced in ESPN's bowl game ratings. A bowl game between two 6-6 teams draws really good ratings compared to anything else ESPN might air in the same time slot, and the cost to ESPN is relatively low.

Doesn't matter whether you or I think that 6-6 teams should be in bowl games. The only way those games are going to go away any time soon is if the ratings sink below the level of SportsCenter re-runs or nightly studio shows.

I think that you misunderstand me. I am ok with all the bowl games. I watch basically everyone. I was just explaining that bowl games have never been about scheduling the best matchup in the long run.
11-24-2014 06:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,891
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #37
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 06:03 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 05:50 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 05:33 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 11:49 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 11:47 AM)WakeForestRanger Wrote:  I think you're missing the point of bowl games.
he's missing the point of what the bowl games have become. He's 100% to the point of what the bowl games used to be.

Bowl games have only been about making money, not the best matchups or what team deserved to be there. The Rose Bowl was started to sell real estate.

1984 BYU (National Champions) played 6-6 Michigan.

Conference tie-ins prevented PSU from playing Nebraska in 1994.

There are plenty of examples. Bowl games are about money. Always have been, always will be.

The fans have spoken, as evidenced in ESPN's bowl game ratings. A bowl game between two 6-6 teams draws really good ratings compared to anything else ESPN might air in the same time slot, and the cost to ESPN is relatively low.

Doesn't matter whether you or I think that 6-6 teams should be in bowl games. The only way those games are going to go away any time soon is if the ratings sink below the level of SportsCenter re-runs or nightly studio shows.

I think that you misunderstand me. I am ok with all the bowl games. I watch basically everyone. I was just explaining that bowl games have never been about scheduling the best matchup in the long run.

Okay, so how is that any different from the BCS selection and now the Playoff Committee. All of them are basically created and run by external entities and their biggest concern is not getting the two best teams, or four best, but the two best and now four best that bring in the most markets. The markets of course are about advertising dollars and advertising dollars is about making money. The BCS used polls and computers to blame for favoring name brands and the selection committee today use another set of subjective criteria and exist to avoid the direct attribution of blame to the networks they serve. We won't be shed of this until it is a P4 for champions only.

Right now we have Oregon (Pacific Region Market), Alabama (Southeastern Region Market), Florida State (Atlantic Seaboard Markets), and Mississippi State (for insurance that the Southeast is represented). I imagine the committee will favor Ohio State but not because of worthiness, but because of the Northern Midwestern Market they bring to the advertising game. T.C.U. and Baylor are there but the Big 12 would have to have Oklahoma or Texas in those positions to be a lock for one of the 4 slots. So Ohio State has been moved up. If they win out and the others do as well the committee will feel the pressure to include them because that will be millions more that will be made than if they included Miss State from a very small market draw and as a second school from an already engaged market area. It also doesn't hurt that Florida State, Alabama, and Oregon are all national brands. Ohio State would given you 4 national brands representing four distinct regions of the country and would maximize the ad revenue for the 3 games.

It doesn't have 1 damned thing to do with football, SOS, or the Big 12 not having a championship game. It's still about the money. The other junk is just window dressing to spin the final decision into what is the most profitable decision. Mississippi State has to remain viable until Alabama's entry is certain. The SEC demographic is still the most rabid and should they not have a school in the playoff ad revenue would drop significantly. The Big 10 is the second largest draw. It is what it is, they just go to greater lengths these days to make it seem legitimate.
(This post was last modified: 11-24-2014 09:06 PM by JRsec.)
11-24-2014 08:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Offline
The Black Knight of The Deplorables

Posts: 9,618
Joined: Oct 2013
I Root For: Army, SFU
Location: Michie Stadium 1945
Post: #38
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
(11-24-2014 08:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 06:03 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 05:50 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 05:33 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  
(11-24-2014 11:49 AM)stever20 Wrote:  he's missing the point of what the bowl games have become. He's 100% to the point of what the bowl games used to be.

Bowl games have only been about making money, not the best matchups or what team deserved to be there. The Rose Bowl was started to sell real estate.

1984 BYU (National Champions) played 6-6 Michigan.

Conference tie-ins prevented PSU from playing Nebraska in 1994.

There are plenty of examples. Bowl games are about money. Always have been, always will be.

The fans have spoken, as evidenced in ESPN's bowl game ratings. A bowl game between two 6-6 teams draws really good ratings compared to anything else ESPN might air in the same time slot, and the cost to ESPN is relatively low.

Doesn't matter whether you or I think that 6-6 teams should be in bowl games. The only way those games are going to go away any time soon is if the ratings sink below the level of SportsCenter re-runs or nightly studio shows.

I think that you misunderstand me. I am ok with all the bowl games. I watch basically everyone. I was just explaining that bowl games have never been about scheduling the best matchup in the long run.

Okay, so how is that any different from the BCS selection and now the Playoff Committee. All of them are basically created and run by external entities and their biggest concern is not getting the two best teams, or four best, but the two best and now four best that bring in the most markets. The markets of course are about advertising dollars and advertising dollars is about making money. The BCS used polls and computers to blame for favoring name brands and the selection committee today use another set of subjective criteria and exist to avoid the direct attribution of blame to the networks they serve. We won't be shed of this until it is a P4 for champions only.

Right now we have Oregon (Pacific Region Market), Alabama (Southeastern Region Market), Florida State (Atlantic Seaboard Markets), and Mississippi State (for insurance that the Southeast is represented). I imagine the committee will favor Ohio State but not because of worthiness, but because of the Northern Midwestern Market they bring to the advertising game. T.C.U. and Baylor are there but the Big 12 would have to have Oklahoma or Texas in those positions to be a lock for one of the 4 slots. So Ohio State has been moved up. If they win out and the others do as well the committee will feel the pressure to include them because that will be millions more that will be made than if they included Miss State from a very small market draw and as a second school from an already engaged market area. It also doesn't hurt that Florida State, Alabama, and Oregon are all national brands. Ohio State would given you 4 national brands representing four distinct regions of the country and would maximize the ad revenue for the 3 games.

It doesn't have 1 damned thing to do with football, SOS, or the Big 12 not having a championship game. It's still about the money. The other junk is just window dressing to spin the final decision into what is the most profitable decision. Mississippi State has to remain viable until Alabama's entry is certain. The SEC demographic is still the most rabid and should they not have a school in the playoff ad revenue would drop significantly. The Big 10 is the second largest draw. It is what it is, they just go to greater lengths these days to make it seem legitimate.

It isn't. I tolerated the existence of the BCS and I knew beforehand that a playoff wouldn't fix the problems of college football. Call me cynical but I knew the playoff was all about maximizing the dough.

I have no problem with the bowls being about money as long as people are aware of it. I wish CFB wasn't so money driven but that is just a fact of life that people are so devoted to the almighty dollar bill. I would like to see bowl games based on the polls instead of conference tie-ins, but either way bowl games bring joy to my life so I shall continue to watch them. They bond my father and I together and we really don't have much in common outside football and a temper.
11-25-2014 12:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 46,227
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #39
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
I think one big thing is how the access bowls now are on merit rather than name. So like for instance TCU or Baylor- whichever one of them isn't the "champion" will be in an access bowl. meanwhile some other bigger named teams that would be 12-14 won't be in the access bowls.
11-25-2014 12:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,558
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 180
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #40
RE: SEC has 11 bowl-eligible teams
S20,
I have to disagree. I think the tie-ins hurt worse than big name. Even going with that route, they are picking highest ranked P5 availables. Take for example, the Orange will have hopefully a top 20 team due to ACC tie-in. When it is the years of fewer access teams, it could get interesting. Imagine the year where there is only ONE Open Access Slot, lets say ECU and BSU are top 10, would either get in over an SEC or B10 ranked next to them if they are not in the playoffs?
11-25-2014 01:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.