(12-08-2013 06:29 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 06:20 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  Several WKU players are now tweeting that the season's over. I'm guessing they've been officially told there's no Bowl game for them. I'm hoping they weren't strung along with false hope only to be let down hard.

Same with ULM. You guys deserved a bowl. We didn't, but I sure would have taken it. I think we were CLOSE.

Not to be an ass, but none of the Belt teams were close to an at large this year. There were too many teams for the P5 that could be taken at large. It will be near impossible for a G5 team to ever beat out a P5 team for a bowl spot.

WKU should have gone bowling. 8-4 record should have got them one.

Granted I have not followed the bowl scene very much as Ga. Southern has been in the FCS and playoffs, but I am learning fast how the whole thing works.

(12-08-2013 06:37 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  WKU should have gone bowling. 8-4 record should have got them one.

With the way the bowl situation turned out this year (79 eligible teams for 70 slots), even 9-3 would not have been enough.

(12-08-2013 06:40 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 06:37 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  WKU should have gone bowling. 8-4 record should have got them one.

With the way the bowl situation turned out this year (79 eligible teams for 70 slots), even 9-3 would not have been enough.

9-3 would have put us in a 3 way tie for 1st in the Belt (assuming the extra win wasn't against UT). That would have made for one mess of a time for the conference. I still think that the Belt needs to distinguish a true champion each year through tie-breakers.

(12-08-2013 06:48 PM)freshtop Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 06:40 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 06:37 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  WKU should have gone bowling. 8-4 record should have got them one.

With the way the bowl situation turned out this year (79 eligible teams for 70 slots), even 9-3 would not have been enough.

9-3 would have put us in a 3 way tie for 1st in the Belt (assuming the extra win wasn't against UT). That would have made for one mess of a time for the conference. I still think that the Belt needs to distinguish a true champion each year through tie-breakers.

Nothing the league can do this year. NCAA waited one year too late to drop the moratorium on creating bowls.

Well the year in football closes for all except Ark. St. and Louisiana. I hope they both win in their bowls. As I have said before I really don't feel that badly for the 4 6-6 teams that do not go bowling. A 6-6 team is a very marginal bowl team anyway. I do feel badly for WKU who finished 8-4.

Next year is a new year. With 5 more bowls and 3 guaranteed ones for the SBC hopefully the situation will be much better next year.

Were there any at-large 6-6 teams that got in over 7/7+ wins this year? That is where the issue lies. A couple years ago all at larges had to be filled by 7(+) win teams before a 6-6 could be selected. I know they killed that a couple years ago.

I didn't believe that Troy deserved a bowl at 6-6 but I deffinately would have taken one!

I hate it for WKU.

At least the two champs got bowls.

(12-08-2013 07:07 PM)TrojanNation Wrote:  Were there any at-large 6-6 teams that got in over 7/7+ wins this year? That is where the issue lies. A couple years ago all at larges had to be filled by 7(+) win teams before a 6-6 could be selected. I know they killed that a couple years ago.

I didn't believe that Troy deserved a bowl at 6-6 but I deffinately would have taken one!

I hate it for WKU.

At least the two champs got bowls.

Yes. 6-6 Pittsburgh 6-6 Syracuse, and 6-6 Oregon State all got bowls over Toledo and WKU.

(12-08-2013 06:48 PM)freshtop Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 06:40 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 06:37 PM)GaSoEagle Wrote:  WKU should have gone bowling. 8-4 record should have got them one.

With the way the bowl situation turned out this year (79 eligible teams for 70 slots), even 9-3 would not have been enough.

9-3 would have put us in a 3 way tie for 1st in the Belt (assuming the extra win wasn't against UT). That would have made for one mess of a time for the conference. I still think that the Belt needs to distinguish a true champion each year through tie-breakers.

^this^

Rutgers is a joke and Pitt...Every season they back in bowls and it makes me sick to look at their schedule...

Oh well not a surprise we did not go bowling, join MTSU last season...However the outrage is much more quite, WKU fans know the conf. bowl tie is a joke in SBC and cannot wait to join CUSA....

(12-08-2013 10:10 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  cannot wait to join CUSA....

We've heard.

Sorry to WKU. Clearly deserved to be bowling.

(12-08-2013 10:26 PM)slappycajun Wrote:  Sorry to WKU. Clearly deserved to be bowling.

.
Think about the situation from the seniors perspective, these kids deserve to have another game and it's a shame they don't. Until July 1st 2014 we still represent the SBC.
They won 8 games and didn't lose a game to a team that didn't have at least a .500 record. Unlike MTSU last season we didn't lose to a FBS team and did not get drilled by ASU 45-0.
It sucks that teams like Rutgers and Pitt have another game and WKU does not.

(12-08-2013 11:02 PM)Franko Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 10:26 PM)slappycajun Wrote:  Sorry to WKU. Clearly deserved to be bowling.

.
Think about the situation from the seniors perspective, these kids deserve to have another game and it's a shame they don't. Until July 1st 2014 we still represent the SBC.
They won 8 games and didn't lose a game to a team that didn't have at least a .500 record. Unlike MTSU last season we didn't lose to a FBS team and did not get drilled by ASU 45-0.
It sucks that teams like Rutgers and Pitt have another game and WKU does not.

You also weren't playing for a conference championship in your 12th game either. But yes, it will be better for you next year.