(12-01-2014 02:07 PM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ]if UL were in the same spot, wouldn't you want your AD fighting to get your team into a bowl game?
Are we certain how much of this is actually "fighting to get into a bowl"?
Or, given the odds,
just a ceremonial gesture made for the Eagle faithful?
(12-01-2014 02:17 PM)bokobobcat1919 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 02:07 PM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ]if UL were in the same spot, wouldn't you want your AD fighting to get your team into a bowl game?
Are we certain how much of this is actually "fighting to get into a bowl"?
Or, given the odds,
is it really just a ceremonial gesture made for the Eagle faithful?
This exactly, but knowing it is not feasible, they should have bowed out this morning.
(12-01-2014 02:17 PM)bokobobcat1919 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 02:07 PM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ]if UL were in the same spot, wouldn't you want your AD fighting to get your team into a bowl game?
Are we certain how much of this is actually "fighting to get into a bowl"?
Or, given the odds,
is it really just a ceremonial gesture made for the Eagle faithful?
either way, would you want your AD doing the same thing given you were in the exact situation?
(12-01-2014 02:12 PM)epiccajun Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 02:07 PM)NCeagle Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 01:55 PM)epiccajun Wrote: [ -> ]Didn't take long for Georgia Southern to cement it's place as the most exhaustively annoying program in the SBC .....
Not that I wouldn't expect other schools to fight a well, but I'm sure the Eagles will drag it out as long and exhaustively as possible. Ughhhhh .....
Together We Rise .....
if UL were in the same spot, wouldn't you want your AD fighting to get your team into a bowl game?
Read my post a little closer ..... of course I would, I think it's just the fact that Ga South will do it in the most inconveinent, exhaustively annoying way possible, to the point of delaying announcements and letting other programs move on ......
Together We Rise ...... meh.
We filed a request for a waiver, which apparently everyone expected to be shot down and it was. We filed an appeal, which is our right. I don't see how that is annoying. now if Georgia Southern v. NCAA et al. hit the courts i could see your argument.
if the appeal is shot down, then that will probably be the end of it. I'm just guessing that Bowls would not be delaying the process if none of them were interested in Georgia Southern.
We spent years with an Admin that went out of it's way to reign in our growth. So forgive us if we get a little fired up now that we have a President and an AD that are not afraid to be an unabashed advocate of Georgia Southern.
Luke Matheson over at redwolfreport.com just tweeted this:
"I just spoke with the Sun Belt Conference, and was told no timeline has been given for the ruling on Georgia Southern's appeal."
are you kidding me SBC? NO and Camellia have their games in 3 weeks!
(12-01-2014 01:58 PM)KJ Eagle Wrote: [ -> ]Talking about "adult" and "reality" on a message board is kind of funny. As I said, anyone else would expect their administration to do the same thing. We aren't holding up anything. No one else has sent out any invites either. Is our appeal keeping them from doing so also?
Not getting into the whole "should the AD do it or not" because I agree with you.
But yes, you are holding it up and yes, invites for other games have been sent out.
Oh, and no, I don't mind it. But that doesn't change that you are indeed holding it up.
I may not be supported by some Ga. Southern fans when I say this but I don't believe we should go bowling this year IF it takes another bowl-eligible Sun Belt out of a bowl game.
(12-01-2014 02:31 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote: [ -> ]I may not be supported by some Ga. Southern fans when I say this but I don't believe we should go bowling this year IF it takes another bowl-eligible Sun Belt out of a bowl game.
I disagree with this because any bowl you would possibly take would take away from a Sun Belt team's bowl.
Like it or not, we are on the bottom rung right now in pecking order for bowls. So any bowl that is taken is one less that an at large Sun Belt team would have a shot at.
To me, it's simple: You won conference, you deserve to go. But the rule shouldn't be changed mid-stream.
(12-01-2014 02:36 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 02:31 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote: [ -> ]I may not be supported by some Ga. Southern fans when I say this but I don't believe we should go bowling this year IF it takes another bowl-eligible Sun Belt out of a bowl game.
I disagree with this because any bowl you would possibly take would take away from a Sun Belt team's bowl.
Like it or not, we are on the bottom rung right now in pecking order for bowls. So any bowl that is taken is one less that an at large Sun Belt team would have a shot at.
To me, it's simple: You won conference, you deserve to go. But the rule shouldn't be changed mid-stream.
I was in your court until I read about the UCF waiver for their post-season bowl ban a couple years ago because the initial punishment for ncaa violations were deemed "too harsh". Now I'm completely for the NCAA granting the waivers to GSU & App State and frankly if Liberty was to apply for a waiver, I'd want them to get a waiver to be bowl-eligible as well.
Punishing our student athletes for winning when you can't even stomach punishing a program with the dreaded "lack of institutional control" is enough for me.
(12-01-2014 09:34 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 09:09 AM)ark30inf Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 03:26 AM)WKUYG Wrote: [ -> ]All of this would not be happening if the rest of you did one thing...
win a few football games vs GS
GS to the Godaddy
UL-L NOB
TXST to the other
What a show that would cause...
total meltdown of ASU fans screaming and crying about needing to get out of this conference...BUT NO WHERE TO GO.
Then UL-L leaves for CUSA (my personal choice would be USA and their beaches and Gulf coast fishing)
Then it get's worse when Liberty gets a invite
Like I said it could have been avoided! bet every coach in the conference works on defending the triple option next year.
You continue to mistake our demands last year for the rules be followed and not ignored as crying.
This year, USA should not be jumping over TXST or stAte. stAte should not be jumping over TXST. The pecking order should be ULL, TXST, A-State.
If you were still here all you would be advocating is that WKU wants what it wants regardless of any rules.
And you'd have 300 power point slides and an excel spreadsheet to make your case with. And nobody would care.
That FCS win against Arkansas Pine Bluff sure does elevate TXST in your mind, huh? USA, TXST, and ASU all have 6 FBS wins. USA did it against the tougher schedule. The only difference is that USA didn't play an FCS game whereas TXST and ASU did. Here are a few nuggets for you, so if a bowl decides to go a different direction than what you feel you might understand why:
Strength of Schedule:
USA - 103
ASU - 117
TXST - 136
Average FBS Opponent Rank:
USA - 85.1
ASU - 87.4
TXST - 96.5
Average Opponent Rank (counting FCS teams in rankings):
USA - 114.5
ASU - 124.4
TXST - 158.8
Number of Games against 6-6 or better FBS teams:
USA - 8
ASU - 7
TXST - 6
Best Win:
ASU - 43
TXST - 79
USA - 94
Worst Loss:
USA - 79
TXST - 96
ASU - 97
Average Scores Among Common opponents (ASU and USA):
USA 29-19 (+10)
ASU 39-35 (+4)
Average Scores Among Common opponents (USA and TXST):
USA 27-23 (+4)
TXST 32-31 (+1)
Average Scores Among Common opponents (ASU and TXST):
ASU 46-25 (+21)
TXST 30-28 (+2)
Average Scores Among Common opponents (All Three):
ASU 45-31 (+14)
USA 24-19 (+5)
TXST 33-32 (+1)
If the bowls pass on USA then I'll be bummed but I can understand why. We didn't do enough to make one. But to unequivocally say that TXST deserves a bowl more than USA isn't really fair, considering we have identical league records and other metrics can be used to make an argument for USA.
dayummmn.....ya'll done made skully go forest whitaker*/courtney lee on ya'll.
*demetric bennett.
(11-30-2014 09:27 PM)bokobobcat1919 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2014 09:10 PM)RedWolfington Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2014 09:04 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote: [ -> ] (11-30-2014 08:49 PM)RedWolfington Wrote: [ -> ]Honestly... Screw this.
I absolutely can blame them. They're a ridiculous thorn in the side of everyone not because of their performance, but because they are as cocky as they come. They remind me of hog fans. And Georgia Southern is going to get an appropriate nickname from me as soon as I think of one that fits perfectly. In due time.
One thing is for sure, I will always and forever have the perception that GS is a whiny infant with "little man" syndrome.
Hell of a first season you guys had, but I literally couldn't care less. You're annoying as hell.
When thinking of Southern, .. . .
The term petulant child comes to mind . . .
Exactly.
Georgia Southern knew the rules before the season started, as did App State. If they wanted to protest this, they should have done it then. Now everybody else has to wait on this fruitless campaign.
UTSA was turned down last year just as Georgia Southern will be refused now. There is no way the NCAA denies some other school a bowl invite this late by moving the goal posts to accommodate Georgia Southern.
Meanwhile, everyone else will lose time to either make travel arrangements or lobby for an at-large bid.
However you slice it, this is not good for the conference.
Not sure we even appealed. We knew the rules and had no chance at all.
(12-01-2014 02:20 PM)RamblinRedWolf44 Wrote: [ -> ]Luke Matheson over at redwolfreport.com just tweeted this:
"I just spoke with the Sun Belt Conference, and was told no timeline has been given for the ruling on Georgia Southern's appeal."
are you kidding me SBC? NO and Camellia have their games in 3 weeks!
Vote has to be taken by 5pm Tuesday.
No one thought we would come close to the Belt championship this year. I really don't believe we would be persuing this if we were not champions, but I still don't believe we should be pushing out another Belt team who is bowl eligible.
I think a resounding "no" is coming from the NCAA but at least our AD can tell our football program he tried everything we could to go to a bowl.
I am trying to keep all bowl talk in this one thread with an updated title. So if you started a bowl thread and it disappeared, look in here
(12-01-2014 03:06 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote: [ -> ]No one thought we would come close to the Belt championship this year. I really don't believe we would be persuing this if we were not champions, but I still don't believe we should be pushing out another Belt team who is bowl eligible.
I think a resounding "no" is coming from the NCAA but at least our AD can tell our football program he tried everything we could to go to a bowl.
That is correct, the appeal for a waiver was only submitted after a share of the title was guaranteed.
(12-01-2014 02:51 PM)dahbeed Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 09:34 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 09:09 AM)ark30inf Wrote: [ -> ] (12-01-2014 03:26 AM)WKUYG Wrote: [ -> ]All of this would not be happening if the rest of you did one thing...
win a few football games vs GS
GS to the Godaddy
UL-L NOB
TXST to the other
What a show that would cause...
total meltdown of ASU fans screaming and crying about needing to get out of this conference...BUT NO WHERE TO GO.
Then UL-L leaves for CUSA (my personal choice would be USA and their beaches and Gulf coast fishing)
Then it get's worse when Liberty gets a invite
Like I said it could have been avoided! bet every coach in the conference works on defending the triple option next year.
You continue to mistake our demands last year for the rules be followed and not ignored as crying.
This year, USA should not be jumping over TXST or stAte. stAte should not be jumping over TXST. The pecking order should be ULL, TXST, A-State.
If you were still here all you would be advocating is that WKU wants what it wants regardless of any rules.
And you'd have 300 power point slides and an excel spreadsheet to make your case with. And nobody would care.
That FCS win against Arkansas Pine Bluff sure does elevate TXST in your mind, huh? USA, TXST, and ASU all have 6 FBS wins. USA did it against the tougher schedule. The only difference is that USA didn't play an FCS game whereas TXST and ASU did. Here are a few nuggets for you, so if a bowl decides to go a different direction than what you feel you might understand why:
Strength of Schedule:
USA - 103
ASU - 117
TXST - 136
Average FBS Opponent Rank:
USA - 85.1
ASU - 87.4
TXST - 96.5
Average Opponent Rank (counting FCS teams in rankings):
USA - 114.5
ASU - 124.4
TXST - 158.8
Number of Games against 6-6 or better FBS teams:
USA - 8
ASU - 7
TXST - 6
Best Win:
ASU - 43
TXST - 79
USA - 94
Worst Loss:
USA - 79
TXST - 96
ASU - 97
Average Scores Among Common opponents (ASU and USA):
USA 29-19 (+10)
ASU 39-35 (+4)
Average Scores Among Common opponents (USA and TXST):
USA 27-23 (+4)
TXST 32-31 (+1)
Average Scores Among Common opponents (ASU and TXST):
ASU 46-25 (+21)
TXST 30-28 (+2)
Average Scores Among Common opponents (All Three):
ASU 45-31 (+14)
USA 24-19 (+5)
TXST 33-32 (+1)
If the bowls pass on USA then I'll be bummed but I can understand why. We didn't do enough to make one. But to unequivocally say that TXST deserves a bowl more than USA isn't really fair, considering we have identical league records and other metrics can be used to make an argument for USA.
dayummmn.....ya'll done made skully go forest whitaker*/courtney lee on ya'll.
*demetric bennett.
USAToday has USA below both stAte and TXST. So does CBSSports. SportsUnbiased also. CFN also.
So I am not alone in my analysis.
So I'm guessing that Georgia Southern fans are going to lead the way next year on a rule change for first year transition teams? Since you feel the rule is unfair. I'll be in your court if that's the case. But you can't cry "injustice!" when suddenly the rule applies to you.
(12-01-2014 03:16 PM)RedWolfington Wrote: [ -> ]So I'm guessing that Georgia Southern fans are going to lead the way next year on a rule change for first year transition teams? Since you feel the rule is unfair. I'll be in your court if that's the case. But you can't cry "injustice!" when suddenly the rule applies to you.
I'd have no problem with amending the rule to allow a transitional team that wins their conference to be eligible for a bowl from this point forward.
(12-01-2014 03:16 PM)RedWolfington Wrote: [ -> ]So I'm guessing that Georgia Southern fans are going to lead the way next year on a rule change for first year transition teams? Since you feel the rule is unfair. I'll be in your court if that's the case. But you can't cry "injustice!" when suddenly the rule applies to you.
Someone can piggy back on our appeal and continue to push to have the rule removed. I don't think GS fans would continue to lead the charge after this year, but would support any team that wanted to change the rules.