(10-25-2018 09:34 AM)Bronc33 Wrote: (10-24-2018 11:53 AM)Ken Barna Wrote: Dear Bronc33,
I don't know if what you say is correct. That they have to pick seven win teams first. A couple years ago, when some teams went to bowl games with 5-7 records, weren't teams with better records left out in the cold?
I did forget to add that conferences with primary bowl tie ins don't have to select a 7 win team over a 6 for that bowl. Say EMU ended the year with 8 wins and there was only one spot left but it was a B1G primary bowl, a 6-6 B1G team would get that spot over an 8 win EMU team.
That is correct if I understand you, BUT
What we are discussing is something very different:
We are discussing the possibility that EITHER the B1G or ACC can not fill the Quick Lube Bowl in Detroit.
That means that either or both conference can not supply a 6 - 6 or better team.
At that point I believe the bowl folks look to a conference with a secondary agreement and a 6 - 6 or better team.
This is when it becomes "Let's make a deal."
Say the Bahamas and Quick Lube are interested in a 7 - 5 EMU team. They are free to make a deal. Say Bahamas takes WMU or NIU and Quick Lube says we want EMU.
The other bowl games are fine with UB, etc. etc.
If EMU has a Heisman Trophy candidate then maybe there would be an issue, but to most bowls EMU, Ohio, WMU, NIU, TOL, etc. are interchangeable and many would prefer the others over EMU as they travel better.
So maybe an Alabama bowl says, we'd prefer Toledo or Ohio to EMU. Quick Lube says fine, we prefer EMU to Ohio. So Ohio goes South.
BUT what if the Quick Lube folks say, "Maybe we prefer Toledo to EMU." Hmmmmmmmmm.