(11-16-2020 07:47 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(11-16-2020 04:50 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(11-15-2020 06:15 PM)Crayton Wrote:  A&M vs. BYU or Cincy that last week?

It makes you wonder, will conferences be more willing to stage 13th games for schools that fail to qualify for respective CCG? If you have two bubble teams that finish 2nd in a P5 division, why not just throw a game together if you need another match on your resume? It’s unlikely but I’m trying to figure out what mechanism it would take. Would teams be able to schedule out of conference? I’d also imagine you can’t compete with your CCG in the same time slot so I don’t know when you’d be able to schedule it.

The Big Ten and Pac-12 were supposed to be the testing grounds for this. I had originally thought it would be a way to get the OSU/PSU loser an extra game to build their case to make the Playoff. It would be also good for Alabama/LSU losers many years (or this year Texas A&M possibly). Of course then Penn State starts 0-4 and Michigan 1-3 and LSU is sub .500 including losing their first game at home to Mississippi State so the idea of two strong teams in the same division in a conference didn't apply this season (maybe Alabama/Texas A&M will still happen).

I've long held (since 2011) that the top two teams in the country not playing in a CCG should face-off in a Wild Card Game. It provides that "13th data point" and helps weed out teams that overperformed against lesser competition (just as most CCGs will).

(11-16-2020 02:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  Sell both at this point.

With luck, they'll meet in the Cotton or Peach Bowl.

That would be the worst like when Boise and TCU met in the Fiesta. Let them play a Power team.

(11-17-2020 09:19 AM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  

(11-16-2020 02:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  Sell both at this point.

With luck, they'll meet in the Cotton or Peach Bowl.

That would be the worst like when Boise and TCU met in the Fiesta. Let them play a Power team.

I don’t disagree, I’m just saying that’s probably what will happen if they both go undefeated.

(11-17-2020 09:19 AM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  

(11-16-2020 02:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  Sell both at this point.

With luck, they'll meet in the Cotton or Peach Bowl.

That would be the worst like when Boise and TCU met in the Fiesta. Let them play a Power team.

Personally, I loved the 2009 FB between TCU and Boise, and it was a tense and entertaining game vs the #4 and #6 teams in the country.

If Cincy and BYU run the table, I'd certainly tune in for a matchup between those two as well.

(11-17-2020 10:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 09:19 AM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  

(11-16-2020 02:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  Sell both at this point.

With luck, they'll meet in the Cotton or Peach Bowl.

That would be the worst like when Boise and TCU met in the Fiesta. Let them play a Power team.

Personally, I loved the 2009 FB between TCU and Boise, and it was a tense and entertaining game vs the #4 and #6 teams in the country.

If Cincy and BYU run the table, I'd certainly tune in for a matchup between those two as well.

It wasn't really an issue with the quality of TCU and Boise, it was the issue that the Auto-bid schools got to dodge both programs while they were placed in the "separate but equal" bowl. Many fans wanted to see Boise and TCU slugging it out with a premiere team. For Boise and TCU fans specifically, the whole point of making a BCS bowl is to finally play an elite caliber team that you wouldn't normally get the chance to play because they aren't going to be scheduling you in the non-conference. It was a chance to prove respectability for your program against a traditional power, but both teams were denied that opportunity.

With the semi's being the Sugar and Rose Bowl this year, BYU picked a good year to make a run.

Even if they dont make the playoffs, there will be 4 at large spots for a NY6 bowl. As long as BYU is in the top 10 they should get a Peach, Cotton, or Fiesta Bowl slot under the selection rules. Cincy should get in as the G5 autobid.

(11-17-2020 11:10 AM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 10:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 09:19 AM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  

(11-16-2020 02:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  Sell both at this point.

With luck, they'll meet in the Cotton or Peach Bowl.

That would be the worst like when Boise and TCU met in the Fiesta. Let them play a Power team.

Personally, I loved the 2009 FB between TCU and Boise, and it was a tense and entertaining game vs the #4 and #6 teams in the country.

If Cincy and BYU run the table, I'd certainly tune in for a matchup between those two as well.

It wasn't really an issue with the quality of TCU and Boise, it was the issue that the Auto-bid schools got to dodge both programs while they were placed in the "separate but equal" bowl. Many fans wanted to see Boise and TCU slugging it out with a premiere team. For Boise and TCU fans specifically, the whole point of making a BCS bowl is to finally play an elite caliber team that you wouldn't normally get the chance to play because they aren't going to be scheduling you in the non-conference. It was a chance to prove respectability for your program against a traditional power, but both teams were denied that opportunity.

I remember the debate about that matchup well, and you do a fine job of restating it. Still, for the fan at home, it was a great matchup.

And, it's hard to see how a better matchup could have been made. That year there were five "BCS" bowl games. One was the BCS title game, Texas vs Alabama. Another was the Rose Bowl, which by agreement matched the PAC and B1G champs, Ohio State and Oregon. So the bowls available were the Fiesta, Orange and Sugar Bowls. #5 Florida went to the Sugar Bowl as the SEC rep, while ACC champ #9 GT was in the Orange Bowl. The other at-large was #10 Iowa. The Big East champ, #3 Cincy was also a floater.

So the other options were to match TCU or Boise against:

#9 ACC champ Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl
#3 Big East champ Cincy in the Fiesta Bowl
#5 Florida in the Sugar Bowl
#10 Iowa in the Fiesta Bowl

Of those, I would say that the only team that qualified to meet the chest-thumping, pride-enhancing desire of a non-AQ to prove itself against a "traditional power" would have been a matchup vs Florida. Florida is a traditional power, they were the previous year's national champ, and Tim Tebow and Urban Meyer playing their last games (Meyer had announced before the Sugar Bowl that he was leaving the Gators but later returned for the 2010 season). Of the remaining schools, Iowa was not a champ and had lost two recent games, Georgia Tech was a weak ACC champ that had just been thumped by Georgia, and while Cincy was #3 and undefeated, they were not a traditional power either and as Big East (Least) champ were almost as much an "outsider" as TCU and Boise.

So you had a matchup with Florida, but then if you match TCU or Boise against Florida, the other one gets stuck with a game that wasn't the kind of "test" they were looking for anyway.

Finally, while the non-AQ schools should not have been discriminated against in terms of matchups, neither should they have had priority either. I mean, if you are Florida in the Sugar Bowl, who would you rather play, the unbeaten champ of another AQ conference, the Big East, or the champs of the MW or WAC? If you are Cincy, and used to experiencing your own brand of disrespect as a member of the Big East, you have the same desire to face a "traditional power" and not a WAC or MW school too. So you have to factor in the desires of the other teams as well.

So all in all, I thought the outcome was fair. The Fiesta pitted #4 vs #6, a very respectable matchup and by no means a "separate but equal" bowl.

(11-17-2020 12:01 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 11:10 AM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 10:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 09:19 AM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  

(11-16-2020 02:29 PM)esayem Wrote:  Sell both at this point.

With luck, they'll meet in the Cotton or Peach Bowl.

That would be the worst like when Boise and TCU met in the Fiesta. Let them play a Power team.

Personally, I loved the 2009 FB between TCU and Boise, and it was a tense and entertaining game vs the #4 and #6 teams in the country.

If Cincy and BYU run the table, I'd certainly tune in for a matchup between those two as well.

It wasn't really an issue with the quality of TCU and Boise, it was the issue that the Auto-bid schools got to dodge both programs while they were placed in the "separate but equal" bowl. Many fans wanted to see Boise and TCU slugging it out with a premiere team. For Boise and TCU fans specifically, the whole point of making a BCS bowl is to finally play an elite caliber team that you wouldn't normally get the chance to play because they aren't going to be scheduling you in the non-conference. It was a chance to prove respectability for your program against a traditional power, but both teams were denied that opportunity.

I remember the debate about that matchup well, and you do a fine job of restating it. Still, for the fan at home, it was a great matchup.

And, it's hard to see how a better matchup could have been made. That year there were five "BCS" bowl games. One was the BCS title game, Texas vs Alabama. Another was the Rose Bowl, which by agreement matched the PAC and B1G champs, Ohio State and Oregon. So the bowls available were the Fiesta, Orange and Sugar Bowls. #5 Florida went to the Sugar Bowl as the SEC rep, while ACC champ #9 GT was in the Orange Bowl. The other at-large was #10 Iowa. The Big East champ, #3 Cincy was also a floater.

So the other options were to match TCU or Boise against:

#9 ACC champ Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl
#3 Big East champ Cincy in the Fiesta Bowl
#5 Florida in the Sugar Bowl
#10 Iowa in the Fiesta Bowl

Of those, I would say that the only team that qualified to meet the chest-thumping, pride-enhancing desire of a non-AQ to prove itself against a "traditional power" would have been a matchup vs Florida. Florida is a traditional power, they were the previous year's national champ, and Tim Tebow and Urban Meyer playing their last games (Meyer had announced before the Sugar Bowl that he was leaving the Gators but later returned for the 2010 season). Of the remaining schools, Iowa was not a champ and had lost two recent games, Georgia Tech was a weak ACC champ that had just been thumped by Georgia, and while Cincy was #3 and undefeated, they were not a traditional power either and as Big East (Least) champ were almost as much an "outsider" as TCU and Boise.

So you had a matchup with Florida, but then if you match TCU or Boise against Florida, the other one gets stuck with a game that wasn't the kind of "test" they were looking for anyway.

Finally, while the non-AQ schools should not have been discriminated against in terms of matchups, neither should they have had priority either. I mean, if you are Florida in the Sugar Bowl, who would you rather play, the unbeaten champ of another AQ conference, the Big East, or the champs of the MW or WAC? If you are Cincy, and used to experiencing your own brand of disrespect as a member of the Big East, you have the same desire to face a "traditional power" and not a WAC or MW school too. So you have to factor in the desires of the other teams as well.

So all in all, I thought the outcome was fair. The Fiesta pitted #4 vs #6, a very respectable matchup and by no means a "separate but equal" bowl.

Good recap Quo I forgot the details of that bowl season including Cincy being undefeated. I still would have liked to see TCU and Boise play Iowa and GT or vice versa. Boise and TCU were top programs during that time period and were outsiders. If Boise and TCU beat up on Iowa, GT or FL maybe that helps the G5 going forward.

The Cincy FL matchup was the bowl I was most looking forward to. I was disappointed that BK left Cincy to take the ND job and left his undefeated Cincy team. The first of many things BK has done that I have not been fond of.

(11-17-2020 06:21 PM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 12:01 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 11:10 AM)Sicembear11 Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 10:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 09:19 AM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  That would be the worst like when Boise and TCU met in the Fiesta. Let them play a Power team.

Personally, I loved the 2009 FB between TCU and Boise, and it was a tense and entertaining game vs the #4 and #6 teams in the country.

If Cincy and BYU run the table, I'd certainly tune in for a matchup between those two as well.

It wasn't really an issue with the quality of TCU and Boise, it was the issue that the Auto-bid schools got to dodge both programs while they were placed in the "separate but equal" bowl. Many fans wanted to see Boise and TCU slugging it out with a premiere team. For Boise and TCU fans specifically, the whole point of making a BCS bowl is to finally play an elite caliber team that you wouldn't normally get the chance to play because they aren't going to be scheduling you in the non-conference. It was a chance to prove respectability for your program against a traditional power, but both teams were denied that opportunity.

I remember the debate about that matchup well, and you do a fine job of restating it. Still, for the fan at home, it was a great matchup.

And, it's hard to see how a better matchup could have been made. That year there were five "BCS" bowl games. One was the BCS title game, Texas vs Alabama. Another was the Rose Bowl, which by agreement matched the PAC and B1G champs, Ohio State and Oregon. So the bowls available were the Fiesta, Orange and Sugar Bowls. #5 Florida went to the Sugar Bowl as the SEC rep, while ACC champ #9 GT was in the Orange Bowl. The other at-large was #10 Iowa. The Big East champ, #3 Cincy was also a floater.

So the other options were to match TCU or Boise against:

#9 ACC champ Georgia Tech in the Orange Bowl
#3 Big East champ Cincy in the Fiesta Bowl
#5 Florida in the Sugar Bowl
#10 Iowa in the Fiesta Bowl

Of those, I would say that the only team that qualified to meet the chest-thumping, pride-enhancing desire of a non-AQ to prove itself against a "traditional power" would have been a matchup vs Florida. Florida is a traditional power, they were the previous year's national champ, and Tim Tebow and Urban Meyer playing their last games (Meyer had announced before the Sugar Bowl that he was leaving the Gators but later returned for the 2010 season). Of the remaining schools, Iowa was not a champ and had lost two recent games, Georgia Tech was a weak ACC champ that had just been thumped by Georgia, and while Cincy was #3 and undefeated, they were not a traditional power either and as Big East (Least) champ were almost as much an "outsider" as TCU and Boise.

So you had a matchup with Florida, but then if you match TCU or Boise against Florida, the other one gets stuck with a game that wasn't the kind of "test" they were looking for anyway.

Finally, while the non-AQ schools should not have been discriminated against in terms of matchups, neither should they have had priority either. I mean, if you are Florida in the Sugar Bowl, who would you rather play, the unbeaten champ of another AQ conference, the Big East, or the champs of the MW or WAC? If you are Cincy, and used to experiencing your own brand of disrespect as a member of the Big East, you have the same desire to face a "traditional power" and not a WAC or MW school too. So you have to factor in the desires of the other teams as well.

So all in all, I thought the outcome was fair. The Fiesta pitted #4 vs #6, a very respectable matchup and by no means a "separate but equal" bowl.

Good recap Quo I forgot the details of that bowl season including Cincy being undefeated. I still would have liked to see TCU and Boise play Iowa and GT or vice versa. Boise and TCU were top programs during that time period and were outsiders. If Boise and TCU beat up on Iowa, GT or FL maybe that helps the G5 going forward.

The Cincy FL matchup was the bowl I was most looking forward to. I was disappointed that BK left Cincy to take the ND job and left his undefeated Cincy team. The first of many things BK has done that I have not been fond of.

Not only did BK leave Cincy before their biggest bowl in history, he took all of the assistants with him, leaving Cincy to be coached by grad assistants & player coaches. That was a bush league move that will forever taint his image.

(11-17-2020 08:04 PM)Edgebrookjeff Wrote:  Not only did BK leave Cincy before their biggest bowl in history, he took all of the assistants with him, leaving Cincy to be coached by grad assistants & player coaches. That was a bush league move that will forever taint his image.

I understand why a Cincy fan would be upset, but I'm not sure how Kelly could have handled it any differently, given that Notre Dame wanted him to be there immediately. And we all would have taken the ND job and would have started immediately if they insisted, so it's IMO a non-starter to say he should have stayed.

(11-17-2020 08:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 08:04 PM)Edgebrookjeff Wrote:  Not only did BK leave Cincy before their biggest bowl in history, he took all of the assistants with him, leaving Cincy to be coached by grad assistants & player coaches. That was a bush league move that will forever taint his image.

I understand why a Cincy fan would be upset, but I'm not sure how Kelly could have handled it any differently, given that Notre Dame wanted him to be there immediately. And we all would have taken the ND job and would have started immediately if they insisted, so it's IMO a non-starter to say he should have stayed.

Agreed. Tough to fault the individual if we were to put ourselves in their situation. That said as fans we rarely do that. I hated Art Briles for bailing on UH before a bowl and we weren't really even playing for anything. I think the real fault is with the NCAA for not establishing a signing period for coaches that begins after bowl season.

(11-17-2020 09:03 PM)WhoseHouse? Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 08:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 08:04 PM)Edgebrookjeff Wrote:  Not only did BK leave Cincy before their biggest bowl in history, he took all of the assistants with him, leaving Cincy to be coached by grad assistants & player coaches. That was a bush league move that will forever taint his image.

I understand why a Cincy fan would be upset, but I'm not sure how Kelly could have handled it any differently, given that Notre Dame wanted him to be there immediately. And we all would have taken the ND job and would have started immediately if they insisted, so it's IMO a non-starter to say he should have stayed.

Agreed. Tough to fault the individual if we were to put ourselves in their situation. That said as fans we rarely do that. I hated Art Briles for bailing on UH before a bowl and we weren't really even playing for anything. I think the real fault is with the NCAA for not establishing a signing period for coaches that begins after bowl season.

That would definitely help avoid situations like this. Probably would be anti-trust though, since you can't really prevent people and organizations from negotiating employment deals, restraint of trade.

The way I handle it is by telling myself "I hope that every four or so years we lose our coach before a bowl game, because that means he made us really good, good enough for him to be head-hunted by the P5".

Oh well ... life in the G5.

Scott Frost stayed with his undefeated UCF team. If I was hiring a coach who insisted that he remain with his team for the bowl instead of bolting that would reinforce hiring the coach to me.

(11-17-2020 08:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 08:04 PM)Edgebrookjeff Wrote:  Not only did BK leave Cincy before their biggest bowl in history, he took all of the assistants with him, leaving Cincy to be coached by grad assistants & player coaches. That was a bush league move that will forever taint his image.

I understand why a Cincy fan would be upset, but I'm not sure how Kelly could have handled it any differently, given that Notre Dame wanted him to be there immediately. And we all would have taken the ND job and would have started immediately if they insisted, so it's IMO a non-starter to say he should have stayed.

Him leaving the bowl like he did is a major sore spot for UC fans. As the poster mentioned, we were left with a skeleton coaching staff made up of grad assistants and in some cases player's dad to face off against Florida's staff Urban Meyer, DC Charlie Strong, and OC Steve Addazio. To this this day, this game is thrown in UC's face by people with an agenda that this bowl loss should preclude us from ever playing in a meaningful bowl game again.

Sell - neither team will be ranked in the top 4 for the play off when the smoke clears at season end even if they are undefeated. Unfortunately the system is stacked against them and those in charge that make the rules and setting the cash cow up in their favor have no incentive to change the corrupt politics involved.

(11-18-2020 08:41 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 08:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 08:04 PM)Edgebrookjeff Wrote:  Not only did BK leave Cincy before their biggest bowl in history, he took all of the assistants with him, leaving Cincy to be coached by grad assistants & player coaches. That was a bush league move that will forever taint his image.

I understand why a Cincy fan would be upset, but I'm not sure how Kelly could have handled it any differently, given that Notre Dame wanted him to be there immediately. And we all would have taken the ND job and would have started immediately if they insisted, so it's IMO a non-starter to say he should have stayed.

Him leaving the bowl like he did is a major sore spot for UC fans. As the poster mentioned, we were left with a skeleton coaching staff made up of grad assistants and in some cases player's dad to face off against Florida's staff Urban Meyer, DC Charlie Strong, and OC Steve Addazio. To this this day, this game is thrown in UC's face by people with an agenda that this bowl loss should preclude us from ever playing in a meaningful bowl game again.

FWIW, if a program went in to a bowl game even more demoralized than Cincy that year, it was Florida, as they were going through that bizarro situation with Urban Meyer being hospitalized after losing the SEC CCG, then resigning, then sort of saying he was coming back but not quite, etc. It was a really weird situation. The whole Florida program was discombobulated.

Truth is, Cincy was just no match athletically for Florida. Florida had 10 draft picks that year, most of any team, including 3 first rounders and 3 second rounders. They were a fully loaded Urban Meyer death star, probably the best team in the 16 years of the BCS not to play in the BCS title game. Cincy had 3 draft picks, none before the 4th round. The only teams that were better than them were Alabama and arguably Texas, and probably not Texas. The SEC CCG that year was between the two best teams in the country. TCU and Boise wouldn't have fared any better against them.

Florida situation isn’t on the same planet as Cincy being coached by grad assistants and player coaches.

(11-18-2020 11:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-18-2020 08:41 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 08:29 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(11-17-2020 08:04 PM)Edgebrookjeff Wrote:  Not only did BK leave Cincy before their biggest bowl in history, he took all of the assistants with him, leaving Cincy to be coached by grad assistants & player coaches. That was a bush league move that will forever taint his image.

I understand why a Cincy fan would be upset, but I'm not sure how Kelly could have handled it any differently, given that Notre Dame wanted him to be there immediately. And we all would have taken the ND job and would have started immediately if they insisted, so it's IMO a non-starter to say he should have stayed.

Him leaving the bowl like he did is a major sore spot for UC fans. As the poster mentioned, we were left with a skeleton coaching staff made up of grad assistants and in some cases player's dad to face off against Florida's staff Urban Meyer, DC Charlie Strong, and OC Steve Addazio. To this this day, this game is thrown in UC's face by people with an agenda that this bowl loss should preclude us from ever playing in a meaningful bowl game again.

FWIW, if a program went in to a bowl game even more demoralized than Cincy that year, it was Florida, as they were going through that bizarro situation with Urban Meyer being hospitalized after losing the SEC CCG, then resigning, then sort of saying he was coming back but not quite, etc. It was a really weird situation. The whole Florida program was discombobulated.

Truth is, Cincy was just no match athletically for Florida. Florida had 10 draft picks that year, most of any team, including 3 first rounders and 3 second rounders. They were a fully loaded Urban Meyer death star, probably the best team in the 16 years of the BCS not to play in the BCS title game. Cincy had 3 draft picks, none before the 4th round. The only teams that were better than them were Alabama and arguably Texas, and probably not Texas. The SEC CCG that year was between the two best teams in the country. TCU and Boise wouldn't have fared any better against them.

Urban Meyer had a medical condition. Kelly packed his bags and left his team high and dry after probably preaching to them all season about teamwork, accountability, loyalty blah blah blah

As A ND fan Kelly leaving Cincy the way he left a bad taste in mouth.

An unbeaten team is something special. There's a committment there.
As for Briles, I don't fault him for not being there for the bowl after they already had a loss. I fault him for not being there mentally for the ccg when he was still being paid. The team was clearly unprepared.

(11-18-2020 02:27 PM)bullet Wrote:  An unbeaten team is something special. There's a committment there.
As for Briles I don't fault him for not being there for the bowl after they already had a loss. I fault him for not being there mentally for the ccg when he was still being paid. The team was clearly unprepared.

Unless you're in the G5.

And I think you're referring to Sumlin