Yet, only 5 of those happened in the BCS/CFP era, and all since the start of the demise of the Big East. And, UConn would not have gotten in without an automatic bid.
I understand the AAC did outstanding this year, but what about last year? I don't hear y'all bragging about that "great" season the conference had!! It's about maintaining consistency, and that is something the AAC has failed to do. I think they can keep the momentum, but make noise on the football field, and not with some outdated statistics!!
(01-04-2016 04:48 PM)leofrog Wrote: Yet, only 5 of those happened in the BCS/CFP era, and all since the start of the demise of the Big East. And, UConn would not have gotten in without an automatic bid.
I understand the AAC did outstanding this year, but what about last year? I don't hear y'all bragging about that "great" season the conference had!! It's about maintaining consistency, and that is something the AAC has failed to do. I think they can keep the momentum, but make noise on the football field, and not with some outdated statistics!!
The point is that 10 out of 12 of our members have played in major bowl games and have some prestige. This is another differentiating factor the AAC has compared to the G4.
(01-04-2016 04:48 PM)leofrog Wrote: Yet, only 5 of those happened in the BCS/CFP era, and all since the start of the demise of the Big East. And, UConn would not have gotten in without an automatic bid.
I understand the AAC did outstanding this year, but what about last year? I don't hear y'all bragging about that "great" season the conference had!! It's about maintaining consistency, and that is something the AAC has failed to do. I think they can keep the momentum, but make noise on the football field, and not with some outdated statistics!!
The point is that 10 out of 12 of our members have played in major bowl games and have some prestige. This is another differentiating factor the AAC has compared to the G4.
When ECU played in the Peach, it wasn't a major bowl. Nice try.
(01-04-2016 04:48 PM)leofrog Wrote: Yet, only 5 of those happened in the BCS/CFP era, and all since the start of the demise of the Big East. And, UConn would not have gotten in without an automatic bid.
I understand the AAC did outstanding this year, but what about last year?
The AAC was horrible this year, 2-6 in bowls, last place among all FBS conferences.
The AAC has had a losing record in bowls every year of its existence.
(01-04-2016 04:48 PM)leofrog Wrote: Yet, only 5 of those happened in the BCS/CFP era, and all since the start of the demise of the Big East. And, UConn would not have gotten in without an automatic bid.
I understand the AAC did outstanding this year, but what about last year? I don't hear y'all bragging about that "great" season the conference had!! It's about maintaining consistency, and that is something the AAC has failed to do. I think they can keep the momentum, but make noise on the football field, and not with some outdated statistics!!
The point is that 10 out of 12 of our members have played in major bowl games and have some prestige. This is another differentiating factor the AAC has compared to the G4.
When ECU played in the Peach, it wasn't a major bowl. Nice try.
Neither was the system we currently have in place. ECU was 9th in the country that year and would have played in a major bowl regardless.
(01-04-2016 04:58 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote: It is true the gap is giant with the AAC vs G4.
I will agree with that when talking about conferences. However, conferences don't necessarily get the G5 bid, individual teams do. And, if teams outside the AAC get that G5 bid, then that does close the gap just like last year.
(01-04-2016 04:48 PM)leofrog Wrote: Yet, only 5 of those happened in the BCS/CFP era, and all since the start of the demise of the Big East. And, UConn would not have gotten in without an automatic bid.
I understand the AAC did outstanding this year, but what about last year? I don't hear y'all bragging about that "great" season the conference had!! It's about maintaining consistency, and that is something the AAC has failed to do. I think they can keep the momentum, but make noise on the football field, and not with some outdated statistics!!
The point is that 10 out of 12 of our members have played in major bowl games and have some prestige. This is another differentiating factor the AAC has compared to the G4.
When ECU played in the Peach, it wasn't a major bowl. Nice try.
Neither was the system we currently have in place. ECU was 9th in the country that year and would have played in a major bowl regardless.
Bottom line is that ECU did not play in a major bowl that year, or any other year so wrong to include them on that chart.
(01-04-2016 04:48 PM)leofrog Wrote: Yet, only 5 of those happened in the BCS/CFP era, and all since the start of the demise of the Big East. And, UConn would not have gotten in without an automatic bid.
I understand the AAC did outstanding this year, but what about last year? I don't hear y'all bragging about that "great" season the conference had!! It's about maintaining consistency, and that is something the AAC has failed to do. I think they can keep the momentum, but make noise on the football field, and not with some outdated statistics!!
The point is that 10 out of 12 of our members have played in major bowl games and have some prestige. This is another differentiating factor the AAC has compared to the G4.
When ECU played in the Peach, it wasn't a major bowl. Nice try.
Neither was the system we currently have in place. ECU was 9th in the country that year and would have played in a major bowl regardless.
Bottom line is that ECU did not play in a major bowl that year, or any other year so wrong to include them on that chart.
Then I shouldn't include the Cotton since it lost its major status in the 90s. This is a chart of bowl participants charted to match the current alignment of major bowls.
(01-04-2016 04:51 PM)NBPirate Wrote: The point is that 10 out of 12 of our members have played in major bowl games and have some prestige. This is another differentiating factor the AAC has compared to the G4.
When ECU played in the Peach, it wasn't a major bowl. Nice try.
Neither was the system we currently have in place. ECU was 9th in the country that year and would have played in a major bowl regardless.
Bottom line is that ECU did not play in a major bowl that year, or any other year so wrong to include them on that chart.
Then I shouldn't include the Cotton since it lost its major status in the 90s. This is a chart of bowl participants charted to match the current alignment of major bowls.
You should not include the Cotton between 1995 - 2013.
Any effort to claim that ECU has played in a major bowl is false and deceptive. They never have.
(01-04-2016 04:48 PM)leofrog Wrote: Yet, only 5 of those happened in the BCS/CFP era, and all since the start of the demise of the Big East. And, UConn would not have gotten in without an automatic bid.
I understand the AAC did outstanding this year, but what about last year? I don't hear y'all bragging about that "great" season the conference had!! It's about maintaining consistency, and that is something the AAC has failed to do. I think they can keep the momentum, but make noise on the football field, and not with some outdated statistics!!
The point is that 10 out of 12 of our members have played in major bowl games and have some prestige. This is another differentiating factor the AAC has compared to the G4.
(01-04-2016 04:51 PM)NBPirate Wrote: The point is that 10 out of 12 of our members have played in major bowl games and have some prestige. This is another differentiating factor the AAC has compared to the G4.
OK.
If that's the standard you are going to use then you have to acknowledge that 14 of 14 ACC schools have played in major bowl games and have more prestige, thus it's a differentiating factor that the ACC has compared to the AAC.
And if you really want to pick nits then 13 of 14 ACC schools have been to major bowls when they were actually major bowls (NC State the lone exception as their Peach Bowl trips are like ECU's when the Peach wasn't on the same level as the other bowls.)
(01-04-2016 04:48 PM)leofrog Wrote: Yet, only 5 of those happened in the BCS/CFP era, and all since the start of the demise of the Big East. And, UConn would not have gotten in without an automatic bid.
I understand the AAC did outstanding this year, but what about last year? I don't hear y'all bragging about that "great" season the conference had!! It's about maintaining consistency, and that is something the AAC has failed to do. I think they can keep the momentum, but make noise on the football field, and not with some outdated statistics!!
But the Cotton was the second most prestigious (and arguably most prestigious besides the Rose for bowls any team could go to) when Houston went 4 times, so that goes both ways.
(01-04-2016 04:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote: When ECU played in the Peach, it wasn't a major bowl. Nice try.
Neither was the system we currently have in place. ECU was 9th in the country that year and would have played in a major bowl regardless.
Bottom line is that ECU did not play in a major bowl that year, or any other year so wrong to include them on that chart.
Then I shouldn't include the Cotton since it lost its major status in the 90s. This is a chart of bowl participants charted to match the current alignment of major bowls.
You should not include the Cotton between 1995 - 2013.
Any effort to claim that ECU has played in a major bowl is false and deceptive. They never have.
I really do not care, but I think it it is hysterical how you attack any thread that sheds a positive light on the non contract conferences. Lame does not even begin to define it.
/
AAC Major Bowl History
![[Image: wak68g.png]](http://i66.tinypic.com/wak68g.png)
.gif)
