(11-12-2020 12:12 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 11:57 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 11:17 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 10:49 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  We won't be in the Liberty Bowl this year. The NCAA granted a 1-yr waiver this year allowing teams with losing records to play in bowl games. That means all conferences will be able to provide eligible teams. Basically, being terrible does not make you ineligible for a bowl.

The Liberty Bowl could have winless Vanderbilt vs. winless Kansas if those were the teams the SEC & Big 12 provided.

So what you are saying is that the bowl organizers have no say, which for sure isn't true at all. No chance in hell.

No, I am saying that the Tigers will not be in the Liberty Bowl this year. Due to the losing record waiver, the SEC & Big 12 will both be able to provide enough eligible teams to fill all of their contracted bowl slots. The Tigers were able to play in the 2017 LB because the SEC didn't have enough eligible teams to fill all of their slots.

To your point... Yes, the bowls have some say, but it's ultimately up to the conferences. The LB was able to lobby the SEC to leave the LB slot open since Memphis was available in 2017. Had we won the AAC title game in 2017, I can guarantee that the LB would have fought like hell to get a SEC team, vs. having to take UCF for the 2017 LB game.

I heard Steve Ehrhart on the radio the other night. We're likely to get a 2-3 win Ole Miss vs. a 3-4 win TCU in the Liberty Bowl. Considering the position that the LB is in with the SEC & B12 selection process, the chances of us getting a team with a winning record are slim to none with the SEC/B12 are supplying the teams.

The Vanderbilt vs. Kansas comment was obviously sarcasm. However it does show the ridiculousness of the waiver.

Fair enough. Last year the $EC had 9 bowl tie ins. This year they have 8 teams that are within one game of .500. They might not be able to do it. Having said that, I would imagine that the LB would be at least middle of the pack in terms of bowls they would want to fill.

The Big 12 has 6 bowl tie ins, plus the NY6. They only have 5 teams within one game of .500. It's a longshot, but maybe we take their spot. Lots of rules are going to fall by the wayside.

But there is no 0.500 requirement this year.

(11-12-2020 12:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:12 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 11:57 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 11:17 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 10:49 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  We won't be in the Liberty Bowl this year. The NCAA granted a 1-yr waiver this year allowing teams with losing records to play in bowl games. That means all conferences will be able to provide eligible teams. Basically, being terrible does not make you ineligible for a bowl.

The Liberty Bowl could have winless Vanderbilt vs. winless Kansas if those were the teams the SEC & Big 12 provided.

So what you are saying is that the bowl organizers have no say, which for sure isn't true at all. No chance in hell.

No, I am saying that the Tigers will not be in the Liberty Bowl this year. Due to the losing record waiver, the SEC & Big 12 will both be able to provide enough eligible teams to fill all of their contracted bowl slots. The Tigers were able to play in the 2017 LB because the SEC didn't have enough eligible teams to fill all of their slots.

To your point... Yes, the bowls have some say, but it's ultimately up to the conferences. The LB was able to lobby the SEC to leave the LB slot open since Memphis was available in 2017. Had we won the AAC title game in 2017, I can guarantee that the LB would have fought like hell to get a SEC team, vs. having to take UCF for the 2017 LB game.

I heard Steve Ehrhart on the radio the other night. We're likely to get a 2-3 win Ole Miss vs. a 3-4 win TCU in the Liberty Bowl. Considering the position that the LB is in with the SEC & B12 selection process, the chances of us getting a team with a winning record are slim to none with the SEC/B12 are supplying the teams.

The Vanderbilt vs. Kansas comment was obviously sarcasm. However it does show the ridiculousness of the waiver.

Fair enough. Last year the $EC had 9 bowl tie ins. This year they have 8 teams that are within one game of .500. They might not be able to do it. Having said that, I would imagine that the LB would be at least middle of the pack in terms of bowls they would want to fill.

The Big 12 has 6 bowl tie ins, plus the NY6. They only have 5 teams within one game of .500. It's a longshot, but maybe we take their spot. Lots of rules are going to fall by the wayside.

But there is no 0.500 requirement this year.

Within one game means 1-2 or 2-3 or better.

(11-12-2020 01:38 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:12 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 11:57 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 11:17 AM)Stammers Wrote:  So what you are saying is that the bowl organizers have no say, which for sure isn't true at all. No chance in hell.

No, I am saying that the Tigers will not be in the Liberty Bowl this year. Due to the losing record waiver, the SEC & Big 12 will both be able to provide enough eligible teams to fill all of their contracted bowl slots. The Tigers were able to play in the 2017 LB because the SEC didn't have enough eligible teams to fill all of their slots.

To your point... Yes, the bowls have some say, but it's ultimately up to the conferences. The LB was able to lobby the SEC to leave the LB slot open since Memphis was available in 2017. Had we won the AAC title game in 2017, I can guarantee that the LB would have fought like hell to get a SEC team, vs. having to take UCF for the 2017 LB game.

I heard Steve Ehrhart on the radio the other night. We're likely to get a 2-3 win Ole Miss vs. a 3-4 win TCU in the Liberty Bowl. Considering the position that the LB is in with the SEC & B12 selection process, the chances of us getting a team with a winning record are slim to none with the SEC/B12 are supplying the teams.

The Vanderbilt vs. Kansas comment was obviously sarcasm. However it does show the ridiculousness of the waiver.

Fair enough. Last year the $EC had 9 bowl tie ins. This year they have 8 teams that are within one game of .500. They might not be able to do it. Having said that, I would imagine that the LB would be at least middle of the pack in terms of bowls they would want to fill.

The Big 12 has 6 bowl tie ins, plus the NY6. They only have 5 teams within one game of .500. It's a longshot, but maybe we take their spot. Lots of rules are going to fall by the wayside.

But there is no 0.500 requirement this year.

Within one game means 1-2 or 2-3 or better.

I haven't seen the "within one game" mandate. The only thing I've found is a total removal of the 0.500 requirement.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...nts-waiver

Quote:The Division I Council waived bowl eligibility requirements for the 2020-21 bowl season and waived the minimum number of contests for all football teams. The Council met by videoconference Tuesday and Wednesday.

(11-12-2020 01:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:38 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:12 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 11:57 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  No, I am saying that the Tigers will not be in the Liberty Bowl this year. Due to the losing record waiver, the SEC & Big 12 will both be able to provide enough eligible teams to fill all of their contracted bowl slots. The Tigers were able to play in the 2017 LB because the SEC didn't have enough eligible teams to fill all of their slots.

To your point... Yes, the bowls have some say, but it's ultimately up to the conferences. The LB was able to lobby the SEC to leave the LB slot open since Memphis was available in 2017. Had we won the AAC title game in 2017, I can guarantee that the LB would have fought like hell to get a SEC team, vs. having to take UCF for the 2017 LB game.

I heard Steve Ehrhart on the radio the other night. We're likely to get a 2-3 win Ole Miss vs. a 3-4 win TCU in the Liberty Bowl. Considering the position that the LB is in with the SEC & B12 selection process, the chances of us getting a team with a winning record are slim to none with the SEC/B12 are supplying the teams.

The Vanderbilt vs. Kansas comment was obviously sarcasm. However it does show the ridiculousness of the waiver.

Fair enough. Last year the $EC had 9 bowl tie ins. This year they have 8 teams that are within one game of .500. They might not be able to do it. Having said that, I would imagine that the LB would be at least middle of the pack in terms of bowls they would want to fill.

The Big 12 has 6 bowl tie ins, plus the NY6. They only have 5 teams within one game of .500. It's a longshot, but maybe we take their spot. Lots of rules are going to fall by the wayside.

But there is no 0.500 requirement this year.

Within one game means 1-2 or 2-3 or better.

I haven't seen the "within one game" mandate. The only thing I've found is a total removal of the 0.500 requirement.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...nts-waiver

Quote:The Division I Council waived bowl eligibility requirements for the 2020-21 bowl season and waived the minimum number of contests for all football teams. The Council met by videoconference Tuesday and Wednesday.

I understand that. All I'm saying is that I don't think any of the bowls are going to want a team that is 3-6 regardless of what the rules say. If it comes down to us at 8-2 or Ole Piss at 3-7, AND with no hotels or restaurants open; I'm pretty sure the bowl organizers would rather have us play in it.

(11-12-2020 02:35 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:38 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:12 PM)Stammers Wrote:  Fair enough. Last year the $EC had 9 bowl tie ins. This year they have 8 teams that are within one game of .500. They might not be able to do it. Having said that, I would imagine that the LB would be at least middle of the pack in terms of bowls they would want to fill.

The Big 12 has 6 bowl tie ins, plus the NY6. They only have 5 teams within one game of .500. It's a longshot, but maybe we take their spot. Lots of rules are going to fall by the wayside.

But there is no 0.500 requirement this year.

Within one game means 1-2 or 2-3 or better.

I haven't seen the "within one game" mandate. The only thing I've found is a total removal of the 0.500 requirement.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...nts-waiver

Quote:The Division I Council waived bowl eligibility requirements for the 2020-21 bowl season and waived the minimum number of contests for all football teams. The Council met by videoconference Tuesday and Wednesday.

I understand that. All I'm saying is that I don't think any of the bowls are going to want a team that is 3-6 regardless of what the rules say. If it comes down to us at 8-2 or Ole Piss at 3-7, AND with no hotels or restaurants open; I'm pretty sure the bowl organizers would rather have us play in it.

I think the big question here is does the NCAA relaxing the win requirement allow the bowls to get out of their contract to "fill from the SEC eligible teams" for instance.

(11-12-2020 10:49 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  We won't be in the Liberty Bowl this year. The NCAA granted a 1-yr waiver this year allowing teams with losing records to play in bowl games. That means all conferences will be able to provide eligible teams. Basically, being terrible does not make you ineligible for a bowl.

The Liberty Bowl could have winless Vanderbilt vs. winless Kansas if those were the teams the SEC & Big 12 provided.

It's unlikely, sure. Not sure how many 3-7 teams will choose to travel to a bowl game, and not sure how many bowls will allow them there. The bowls will have some say.

What I'm saying is that there will likely be swapping and negotiations going on to make the games regional for expense, driving, quarantine, and fan purposes. The bowls, tv, and conferences will agree to ignore the contracts for a year. Payouts are already going to be outside contractual obligations.

If that happens, it MIGHT open the door for the Liberty. Though if I was betting, I'd bet Birmingham.

(11-12-2020 02:35 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:38 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:12 PM)Stammers Wrote:  Fair enough. Last year the $EC had 9 bowl tie ins. This year they have 8 teams that are within one game of .500. They might not be able to do it. Having said that, I would imagine that the LB would be at least middle of the pack in terms of bowls they would want to fill.

The Big 12 has 6 bowl tie ins, plus the NY6. They only have 5 teams within one game of .500. It's a longshot, but maybe we take their spot. Lots of rules are going to fall by the wayside.

But there is no 0.500 requirement this year.

Within one game means 1-2 or 2-3 or better.

I haven't seen the "within one game" mandate. The only thing I've found is a total removal of the 0.500 requirement.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...nts-waiver

Quote:The Division I Council waived bowl eligibility requirements for the 2020-21 bowl season and waived the minimum number of contests for all football teams. The Council met by videoconference Tuesday and Wednesday.

I understand that. All I'm saying is that I don't think any of the bowls are going to want a team that is 3-6 regardless of what the rules say. If it comes down to us at 8-2 or Ole Piss at 3-7, AND with no hotels or restaurants open; I'm pretty sure the bowl organizers would rather have us play in it.

I do not see a scenario where the SEC or B12 allows the Liberty Bowl, or any other bowl game, to substitute Memphis or any other local G5 team, for an "eligible" league member. No way they tell one of their members to stay home, because the Sun Belt 3rd place team deserves this bowl bid more than you do.

(11-12-2020 04:38 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 02:35 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:38 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  But there is no 0.500 requirement this year.

Within one game means 1-2 or 2-3 or better.

I haven't seen the "within one game" mandate. The only thing I've found is a total removal of the 0.500 requirement.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...nts-waiver

Quote:The Division I Council waived bowl eligibility requirements for the 2020-21 bowl season and waived the minimum number of contests for all football teams. The Council met by videoconference Tuesday and Wednesday.

I understand that. All I'm saying is that I don't think any of the bowls are going to want a team that is 3-6 regardless of what the rules say. If it comes down to us at 8-2 or Ole Piss at 3-7, AND with no hotels or restaurants open; I'm pretty sure the bowl organizers would rather have us play in it.

I do not see a scenario where the SEC or B12 allows the Liberty Bowl, or any other bowl game, to substitute Memphis or any other local G5 team, for an "eligible" league member. No way they tell one of their members to stay home, because the Sun Belt 3rd place team deserves this bowl bid more than you do.

Not talking about the 3rd place Sun Belt team. Talking about Memphis and the LB.
The reasons have been stated - health concerns, costs of travel, quarantine procedures before and after from crossing state lines, etc.
And there are 2 ways this could happen.

First, 3-7 teams could refuse to go. Why would they go and extend a disappointing season and run the risk of getting embarrassed on tv while running athletic deficits, if the payouts won't cover the costs?

Second, the Liberty/tv/B12 could work out a swap with - say - the Frisco bowl, to accommodate aforementioned issues.

For example, would a 3-6 TCU team want to come to the Liberty for one game with no financial upside? Very possibly not. However, they might be willing to drive 1-hour to Frisco to take the AAC slot in that bowl.

(11-12-2020 04:38 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 02:35 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:38 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 12:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  But there is no 0.500 requirement this year.

Within one game means 1-2 or 2-3 or better.

I haven't seen the "within one game" mandate. The only thing I've found is a total removal of the 0.500 requirement.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...nts-waiver

Quote:The Division I Council waived bowl eligibility requirements for the 2020-21 bowl season and waived the minimum number of contests for all football teams. The Council met by videoconference Tuesday and Wednesday.

I understand that. All I'm saying is that I don't think any of the bowls are going to want a team that is 3-6 regardless of what the rules say. If it comes down to us at 8-2 or Ole Piss at 3-7, AND with no hotels or restaurants open; I'm pretty sure the bowl organizers would rather have us play in it.

I do not see a scenario where the SEC or B12 allows the Liberty Bowl, or any other bowl game, to substitute Memphis or any other local G5 team, for an "eligible" league member. No way they tell one of their members to stay home, because the Sun Belt 3rd place team deserves this bowl bid more than you do.

Your side of the debate makes no sense because you are exaggerations are irrelevant. It wouldn't be a Sun Belt team. It would be us being the local team and teams like South Carolina, West Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State finding bowls that are closer. It would be Florida teams staying in Florida and Texas teams staying in Texas.

(11-12-2020 07:05 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 04:38 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 02:35 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:38 PM)Stammers Wrote:  Within one game means 1-2 or 2-3 or better.

I haven't seen the "within one game" mandate. The only thing I've found is a total removal of the 0.500 requirement.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...nts-waiver

Quote:The Division I Council waived bowl eligibility requirements for the 2020-21 bowl season and waived the minimum number of contests for all football teams. The Council met by videoconference Tuesday and Wednesday.

I understand that. All I'm saying is that I don't think any of the bowls are going to want a team that is 3-6 regardless of what the rules say. If it comes down to us at 8-2 or Ole Piss at 3-7, AND with no hotels or restaurants open; I'm pretty sure the bowl organizers would rather have us play in it.

I do not see a scenario where the SEC or B12 allows the Liberty Bowl, or any other bowl game, to substitute Memphis or any other local G5 team, for an "eligible" league member. No way they tell one of their members to stay home, because the Sun Belt 3rd place team deserves this bowl bid more than you do.

Your side of the debate makes no sense because you are exaggerations are irrelevant. It wouldn't be a Sun Belt team. It would be us being the local team and teams like South Carolina, West Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State finding bowls that are closer. It would be Florida teams staying in Florida and Texas teams staying in Texas.

This entire discussion started with the topic of Memphis getting an invitation to the Liberty Bowl. I stand by my position that this will not happen. The losing record waiver will prevent that. No SEC Team is going to pass on the Liberty Bowl. The SEC will not allow that to happen.

If you look at the records today, and the current league bowl affiliations...
The B12 has 8 bowl tie-ins. That puts all their above-500 teams in a bowl game. No problems with the B12.

Counting the playoff, the SEC has 8 primary, and 2 secondary bowl affiliations. With no teams "ineligible" due to record, that means LSU, Missouri, Kentucky, Ole Miss, TN, MSU & So Carolina would be available for one of the SEC's contracted slots, despite their losing records (Ky, OM, TN MSU & SoC are all tied at 2-4). Which one of these SEC teams is going to voluntarily decide not to go to a bowl game? Or, which one of these teams is the SEC going to tell not to go to one of the SEC's contracted bowl games because "they don't deserve it"?

As for regional placement of teams in bowl games....
There are 6 bowl games in Texas, and 11 Div 1 football schools in Texas, so it may be possible to fill the minor Texas bowl slots with Texas teams.

There are 9 bowl games are in Florida, and only 7 Div 1 football Florida schools.

(11-13-2020 10:32 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 07:05 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 04:38 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 02:35 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 01:43 PM)aardWolf Wrote:  I haven't seen the "within one game" mandate. The only thing I've found is a total removal of the 0.500 requirement.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/medi...nts-waiver

I understand that. All I'm saying is that I don't think any of the bowls are going to want a team that is 3-6 regardless of what the rules say. If it comes down to us at 8-2 or Ole Piss at 3-7, AND with no hotels or restaurants open; I'm pretty sure the bowl organizers would rather have us play in it.

I do not see a scenario where the SEC or B12 allows the Liberty Bowl, or any other bowl game, to substitute Memphis or any other local G5 team, for an "eligible" league member. No way they tell one of their members to stay home, because the Sun Belt 3rd place team deserves this bowl bid more than you do.

Your side of the debate makes no sense because you are exaggerations are irrelevant. It wouldn't be a Sun Belt team. It would be us being the local team and teams like South Carolina, West Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State finding bowls that are closer. It would be Florida teams staying in Florida and Texas teams staying in Texas.

This entire discussion started with the topic of Memphis getting an invitation to the Liberty Bowl. I stand by my position that this will not happen. The losing record waiver will prevent that. No SEC Team is going to pass on the Liberty Bowl. The SEC will not allow that to happen.

If you look at the records today, and the current league bowl affiliations...
The B12 has 8 bowl tie-ins. That puts all their above-500 teams in a bowl game. No problems with the B12.

Counting the playoff, the SEC has 8 primary, and 2 secondary bowl affiliations. With no teams "ineligible" due to record, that means LSU, Missouri, Kentucky, Ole Miss, TN, MSU & So Carolina would be available for one of the SEC's contracted slots, despite their losing records (Ky, OM, TN MSU & SoC are all tied at 2-4). Which one of these SEC teams is going to voluntarily decide not to go to a bowl game? Or, which one of these teams is the SEC going to tell not to go to one of the SEC's contracted bowl games because "they don't deserve it"?

As for regional placement of teams in bowl games....
There are 6 bowl games in Texas, and 11 Div 1 football schools in Texas, so it may be possible to fill the minor Texas bowl slots with Texas teams.

There are 9 bowl games are in Florida, and only 7 Div 1 football Florida schools.

$EC teams in the Carolinas and Florida that would be considered for the LB might decide to play in a different bowl closer to home. Texas teams might decide to play in a bowl closer to home. The LB might decide that it makes more sense for us to play in it to replace a team that prefers not to travel so far.

The LB would most probably tell a 3-6 team that they don't want them. A 3-6 team would more than likely not want to play in a bowl game.

It seems that you ignored the reasons that a couple of posters gave and repeated the same thing. You are completely missing the point, in addition to your exaggerations. Your argument makes no sense.

It's interesting... You can talk yourself into, or out of, the idea that the Liberty would want, and could accommodate Memphis this year. None of that has any bearing on what will actually happen. So there is no sense in getting all worked up at each over it. Save that vitriol for the Election that has not been determined yet.

There it is.

Only took two pages, but finally this sports thread has been politicized.

(11-13-2020 12:11 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  There it is.

Only took two pages, but finally this sports thread has been politicized.

Huh? I didn't read where GeoSnooker was choosing one side over the other ..............

(11-13-2020 12:11 PM)AlonsoWDC Wrote:  There it is.

Only took two pages, but finally this sports thread has been politicized.

I am with geo. He was just making a joke in comparing the Liberty Bowl
situation with the national election situation. Some people get really uptight
about a lot of nothing.

(11-13-2020 10:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-13-2020 10:32 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 07:05 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 04:38 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 02:35 PM)Stammers Wrote:  I understand that. All I'm saying is that I don't think any of the bowls are going to want a team that is 3-6 regardless of what the rules say. If it comes down to us at 8-2 or Ole Piss at 3-7, AND with no hotels or restaurants open; I'm pretty sure the bowl organizers would rather have us play in it.

I do not see a scenario where the SEC or B12 allows the Liberty Bowl, or any other bowl game, to substitute Memphis or any other local G5 team, for an "eligible" league member. No way they tell one of their members to stay home, because the Sun Belt 3rd place team deserves this bowl bid more than you do.

Your side of the debate makes no sense because you are exaggerations are irrelevant. It wouldn't be a Sun Belt team. It would be us being the local team and teams like South Carolina, West Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State finding bowls that are closer. It would be Florida teams staying in Florida and Texas teams staying in Texas.

This entire discussion started with the topic of Memphis getting an invitation to the Liberty Bowl. I stand by my position that this will not happen. The losing record waiver will prevent that. No SEC Team is going to pass on the Liberty Bowl. The SEC will not allow that to happen.

If you look at the records today, and the current league bowl affiliations...
The B12 has 8 bowl tie-ins. That puts all their above-500 teams in a bowl game. No problems with the B12.

Counting the playoff, the SEC has 8 primary, and 2 secondary bowl affiliations. With no teams "ineligible" due to record, that means LSU, Missouri, Kentucky, Ole Miss, TN, MSU & So Carolina would be available for one of the SEC's contracted slots, despite their losing records (Ky, OM, TN MSU & SoC are all tied at 2-4). Which one of these SEC teams is going to voluntarily decide not to go to a bowl game? Or, which one of these teams is the SEC going to tell not to go to one of the SEC's contracted bowl games because "they don't deserve it"?

As for regional placement of teams in bowl games....
There are 6 bowl games in Texas, and 11 Div 1 football schools in Texas, so it may be possible to fill the minor Texas bowl slots with Texas teams.

There are 9 bowl games are in Florida, and only 7 Div 1 football Florida schools.

$EC teams in the Carolinas and Florida that would be considered for the LB might decide to play in a different bowl closer to home. Texas teams might decide to play in a bowl closer to home. The LB might decide that it makes more sense for us to play in it to replace a team that prefers not to travel so far.

The LB would most probably tell a 3-6 team that they don't want them. A 3-6 team would more than likely not want to play in a bowl game.

It seems that you ignored the reasons that a couple of posters gave and repeated the same thing. You are completely missing the point, in addition to your exaggerations. Your argument makes no sense.

What I am missing in these arguments is exactly which eligible SEC team will decline a Liberty Bowl invitation, allowing Memphis to take that slot? This isn't the Ivy League, its the SEC.

The lower-tier bowls may request certain teams, and the conference will try to work with them, but its ultimately the conference's decision who goes where. And, in this situation, it really doesn't matter what the Liberty Bowl prefers. The SEC has a contract with the LB, and the LB is going to honor it. The SEC isn't going to deny a bowl bid to one of its eligible members so Memphis can play in the LB.

Fair argument: South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Texas A&M will not likely be in the LB this year. But, it won't be because they decline the invitation, it will be because the SEC won't send them here when they've got Ole Miss, Miss State & Tennessee eligible to send to Memphis instead.

(11-13-2020 02:40 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-13-2020 10:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-13-2020 10:32 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 07:05 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 04:38 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  I do not see a scenario where the SEC or B12 allows the Liberty Bowl, or any other bowl game, to substitute Memphis or any other local G5 team, for an "eligible" league member. No way they tell one of their members to stay home, because the Sun Belt 3rd place team deserves this bowl bid more than you do.

Your side of the debate makes no sense because you are exaggerations are irrelevant. It wouldn't be a Sun Belt team. It would be us being the local team and teams like South Carolina, West Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State finding bowls that are closer. It would be Florida teams staying in Florida and Texas teams staying in Texas.

This entire discussion started with the topic of Memphis getting an invitation to the Liberty Bowl. I stand by my position that this will not happen. The losing record waiver will prevent that. No SEC Team is going to pass on the Liberty Bowl. The SEC will not allow that to happen.

If you look at the records today, and the current league bowl affiliations...
The B12 has 8 bowl tie-ins. That puts all their above-500 teams in a bowl game. No problems with the B12.

Counting the playoff, the SEC has 8 primary, and 2 secondary bowl affiliations. With no teams "ineligible" due to record, that means LSU, Missouri, Kentucky, Ole Miss, TN, MSU & So Carolina would be available for one of the SEC's contracted slots, despite their losing records (Ky, OM, TN MSU & SoC are all tied at 2-4). Which one of these SEC teams is going to voluntarily decide not to go to a bowl game? Or, which one of these teams is the SEC going to tell not to go to one of the SEC's contracted bowl games because "they don't deserve it"?

As for regional placement of teams in bowl games....
There are 6 bowl games in Texas, and 11 Div 1 football schools in Texas, so it may be possible to fill the minor Texas bowl slots with Texas teams.

There are 9 bowl games are in Florida, and only 7 Div 1 football Florida schools.

$EC teams in the Carolinas and Florida that would be considered for the LB might decide to play in a different bowl closer to home. Texas teams might decide to play in a bowl closer to home. The LB might decide that it makes more sense for us to play in it to replace a team that prefers not to travel so far.

The LB would most probably tell a 3-6 team that they don't want them. A 3-6 team would more than likely not want to play in a bowl game.

It seems that you ignored the reasons that a couple of posters gave and repeated the same thing. You are completely missing the point, in addition to your exaggerations. Your argument makes no sense.

What I am missing in these arguments is exactly which eligible SEC team will decline a Liberty Bowl invitation, allowing Memphis to take that slot? This isn't the Ivy League, its the SEC.

The lower-tier bowls may request certain teams, and the conference will try to work with them, but its ultimately the conference's decision who goes where. And, in this situation, it really doesn't matter what the Liberty Bowl prefers. The SEC has a contract with the LB, and the LB is going to honor it. The SEC isn't going to deny a bowl bid to one of its eligible members so Memphis can play in the LB.

Fair argument: South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Texas A&M will not likely be in the LB this year. But, it won't be because they decline the invitation, it will be because the SEC won't send them here when they've got Ole Miss, Miss State & Tennessee eligible to send to Memphis instead.

Tennessee is staring 3-7 in the face, MSU 3-8 or 4-7. IF Ole Piss can beat South Carolina they would maybe get to 4-6. If they are at 3-7 nobody in their right mind would invite them, and they would be crazy to even want to play in it.

Quote:The lower-tier bowls may request certain teams, and the conference will try to work with them, but its ultimately the conference's decision who goes where

Quote:it really doesn't matter what the Liberty Bowl prefers.

Quote:The SEC isn't going to deny a bowl bid to one of its eligible members so Memphis can play in the LB.

AGAIN, you are working with the assumption that your arguments make any sense (which they don't), that there isn't a pandemic, and that the organizers will accept a team that is 3-7 playing in their bowl game. It is public knowledge that the bowls are going to make changes that result in the least amount of travel possible.

Another poster gave the example of the Frisco Bowl. It should work out quite nicely, with Cincinnati going to a NY6 bowl, which leaves the door open for SMU to play in it, instead of teams from the MAC and MWC. There could easily be a scenario where the Big 12 puts a Texas based team at that bowl and allows us to take their place.

It might happen or it might not. To make a claim with certainty that the LB would allow a 3-7 team to play in their bowl game, is insane. To make a claim with certainty that a 3-7 team would want to play in a bowl game, is insane. Everything is on the table. You are apparently the only poster on the planet that doesn't think so.

(11-13-2020 02:40 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-13-2020 10:51 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-13-2020 10:32 AM)CKMcDan Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 07:05 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(11-12-2020 04:38 PM)CKMcDan Wrote:  I do not see a scenario where the SEC or B12 allows the Liberty Bowl, or any other bowl game, to substitute Memphis or any other local G5 team, for an "eligible" league member. No way they tell one of their members to stay home, because the Sun Belt 3rd place team deserves this bowl bid more than you do.

Your side of the debate makes no sense because you are exaggerations are irrelevant. It wouldn't be a Sun Belt team. It would be us being the local team and teams like South Carolina, West Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State finding bowls that are closer. It would be Florida teams staying in Florida and Texas teams staying in Texas.

This entire discussion started with the topic of Memphis getting an invitation to the Liberty Bowl. I stand by my position that this will not happen. The losing record waiver will prevent that. No SEC Team is going to pass on the Liberty Bowl. The SEC will not allow that to happen.

If you look at the records today, and the current league bowl affiliations...
The B12 has 8 bowl tie-ins. That puts all their above-500 teams in a bowl game. No problems with the B12.

Counting the playoff, the SEC has 8 primary, and 2 secondary bowl affiliations. With no teams "ineligible" due to record, that means LSU, Missouri, Kentucky, Ole Miss, TN, MSU & So Carolina would be available for one of the SEC's contracted slots, despite their losing records (Ky, OM, TN MSU & SoC are all tied at 2-4). Which one of these SEC teams is going to voluntarily decide not to go to a bowl game? Or, which one of these teams is the SEC going to tell not to go to one of the SEC's contracted bowl games because "they don't deserve it"?

As for regional placement of teams in bowl games....
There are 6 bowl games in Texas, and 11 Div 1 football schools in Texas, so it may be possible to fill the minor Texas bowl slots with Texas teams.

There are 9 bowl games are in Florida, and only 7 Div 1 football Florida schools.

$EC teams in the Carolinas and Florida that would be considered for the LB might decide to play in a different bowl closer to home. Texas teams might decide to play in a bowl closer to home. The LB might decide that it makes more sense for us to play in it to replace a team that prefers not to travel so far.

The LB would most probably tell a 3-6 team that they don't want them. A 3-6 team would more than likely not want to play in a bowl game.

It seems that you ignored the reasons that a couple of posters gave and repeated the same thing. You are completely missing the point, in addition to your exaggerations. Your argument makes no sense.

What I am missing in these arguments is exactly which eligible SEC team will decline a Liberty Bowl invitation, allowing Memphis to take that slot? This isn't the Ivy League, its the SEC.

The lower-tier bowls may request certain teams, and the conference will try to work with them, but its ultimately the conference's decision who goes where. And, in this situation, it really doesn't matter what the Liberty Bowl prefers. The SEC has a contract with the LB, and the LB is going to honor it. The SEC isn't going to deny a bowl bid to one of its eligible members so Memphis can play in the LB.

Fair argument: South Carolina, Georgia, Florida and Texas A&M will not likely be in the LB this year. But, it won't be because they decline the invitation, it will be because the SEC won't send them here when they've got Ole Miss, Miss State & Tennessee eligible to send to Memphis instead.

Arkansas is better than that last three

IKE's has two sources that say if we win out,
TIGERNATION will be in the Liberty However, we must run the table

Montgomery Bowl against someone like Ga Tech or Louisville could be cool...easy to get to, P5 opponent, visit the state capital.