We are getting to the point (most teams have played 2/3s of their season) where folks are starting to wonder how bowl games will shake out...

CFB playoffs will release their first poll next week.

I decided to see how 4 - 4 places us within the MAC pecking order for bowl games:

1). UB - 7 - 1

2). WMU - 6 - 2 is probably the #2. Tough schedule with TOL, Ohio and NIU.

3). NIU and Ohio are both 4 - 3 (NIU has a tough schedule with BYU, TOL and WMU) (OHIO plays WMU and UB).

5). EMU is 4 - 4. Favorable schedule beyond Army.

6). A number of teams with 3 wins.

We have big, big upside if we beat Army Saturday...

(10-24-2018 05:12 AM)emu steve Wrote:  We are getting to the point (most teams have played 2/3s of their season) where folks are starting to wonder how bowl games will shake out...

CFB playoffs will release their first poll next week.

I decided to see how 4 - 4 places us within the MAC pecking order for bowl games:

1). UB - 7 - 1

2). WMU - 6 - 2 is probably the #2. Tough schedule with TOL, Ohio and NIU.

3). NIU and Ohio are both 4 - 3 (NIU has a tough schedule with BYU, TOL and WMU) (OHIO plays WMU and UB).

5). EMU is 4 - 4. Favorable schedule beyond Army.

6). A number of teams with 3 wins.

We have big, big upside if we beat Army Saturday...

Unfortunately the MAC is a second choice for the Quick Lube game which would be perfect for us.

(10-24-2018 06:08 AM)emu79 Wrote:  

(10-24-2018 05:12 AM)emu steve Wrote:  We are getting to the point (most teams have played 2/3s of their season) where folks are starting to wonder how bowl games will shake out...

CFB playoffs will release their first poll next week.

I decided to see how 4 - 4 places us within the MAC pecking order for bowl games:

1). UB - 7 - 1

2). WMU - 6 - 2 is probably the #2. Tough schedule with TOL, Ohio and NIU.

3). NIU and Ohio are both 4 - 3 (NIU has a tough schedule with BYU, TOL and WMU) (OHIO plays WMU and UB).

5). EMU is 4 - 4. Favorable schedule beyond Army.

6). A number of teams with 3 wins.

We have big, big upside if we beat Army Saturday...

Unfortunately the MAC is a second choice for the Quick Lube game which would be perfect for us.

That is true, but we'd be say maybe 3 or 4th bowl choice if we end up 7 - 5 (the MACC game teams, etc. would be higher).

Therefore, I would think that a MAC bowl would free us to the Detroit bowl is an at large bid opens up.

Don't know if we need 7 wins to qualify for an at large bowl bid.

(10-24-2018 07:15 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(10-24-2018 06:08 AM)emu79 Wrote:  

(10-24-2018 05:12 AM)emu steve Wrote:  We are getting to the point (most teams have played 2/3s of their season) where folks are starting to wonder how bowl games will shake out...

CFB playoffs will release their first poll next week.

I decided to see how 4 - 4 places us within the MAC pecking order for bowl games:

1). UB - 7 - 1

2). WMU - 6 - 2 is probably the #2. Tough schedule with TOL, Ohio and NIU.

3). NIU and Ohio are both 4 - 3 (NIU has a tough schedule with BYU, TOL and WMU) (OHIO plays WMU and UB).

5). EMU is 4 - 4. Favorable schedule beyond Army.

6). A number of teams with 3 wins.

We have big, big upside if we beat Army Saturday...

Unfortunately the MAC is a second choice for the Quick Lube game which would be perfect for us.

That is true, but we'd be say maybe 3 or 4th bowl choice if we end up 7 - 5 (the MACC game teams, etc. would be higher).

Therefore, I would think that a MAC bowl would free us to the Detroit bowl is an at large bid opens up.

Don't know if we need 7 wins to qualify for an at large bowl bid.

I think 7-5 gets a bowl. 6-6 won't cut it for a MAC team. Must go at least 3-1 down the stretch. A win over Army and Purdue would be sexy. A blasting of CMU wouldn't mean that much but we'd all enjoy it.

IF we get a bowl I'm hoping it's in FL or AL. Easier to make the trip. Detroit would obviously be a top choice as well.

I think there are rules about a 6 - 6 team being selected before an eligible 7 - 5 team within a conference.

Last year not all 6 - 6 teams were selected, I believe. The year before all 6 - 6 plus a couple 5 - 7 teams were selected.

The rule of thumb these days is that most years the number of teams 6 - 6 or better is EQUAL to the number of bowl bids.

My guess is that we have enough good wins to make it at 6 - 6.

(10-24-2018 07:42 AM)emu steve Wrote:  I think there are rules about a 6 - 6 team being selected before an eligible 7 - 5 team within a conference.

Last year not all 6 - 6 teams were selected, I believe. The year before all 6 - 6 plus a couple 5 - 7 teams were selected.

The rule of thumb these days is that most years the number of teams 6 - 6 or better is EQUAL to the number of bowl bids.

My guess is that we have enough good wins to make it at 6 - 6.

True, last year WMU, Buffalo and one other team were left out of bowls at 6-6. They have to pick 7 win teams first.

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?

(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?

Ken,

I think, indirectly, I addressed that issue.

It is a case of number of bowl bids vs. number of eligible teams.

Some years there are a deficit (of teams), but most years it is close to 1:1.

I'm going off the top of my head, but I don't think there were as many bids (i.e., bowl games) last year as the year before hence a few 6 - 6 were shut out.

(10-24-2018 05:12 AM)emu steve Wrote:  We are getting to the point (most teams have played 2/3s of their season) where folks are starting to wonder how bowl games will shake out...

A little over a week ago they asked all the players who didn't have a current passport to get the necessary documents to the Football Office so they could manage applications for each team member.

(10-24-2018 10:33 PM)cidbearit Wrote:  

(10-24-2018 05:12 AM)emu steve Wrote:  We are getting to the point (most teams have played 2/3s of their season) where folks are starting to wonder how bowl games will shake out...

A little over a week ago they asked all the players who didn't have a current passport to get the necessary documents to the Football Office so they could manage applications for each team member.

Good to hear.

Sounds like we could be a candidate again for the Bahamas Bowl along with a few other teams.

Quite frankly with a 4 - 4 record and a favorable schedule the rest of the way, the football program should indeed to thinking ahead of a bowl game.

(10-25-2018 04:36 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(10-24-2018 10:33 PM)cidbearit Wrote:  

(10-24-2018 05:12 AM)emu steve Wrote:  We are getting to the point (most teams have played 2/3s of their season) where folks are starting to wonder how bowl games will shake out...

A little over a week ago they asked all the players who didn't have a current passport to get the necessary documents to the Football Office so they could manage applications for each team member.

Good to hear.

Sounds like we could be a candidate again for the Bahamas Bowl along with a few other teams.

Quite frankly with a 4 - 4 record and a favorable schedule the rest of the way, the football program should indeed to thinking ahead of a bowl game.

I'll start thinking ahead once we get to six wins. I'm not taking anything for granted.

Mid-week MACaction starts tonight. Two 3 - 4 teams are playing.

The bowl eligible mixing really begins. 3 - 5 records are hard to overcome (hint: EMU 2017).

(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?

They can only take a 5-7 teams after all of the 6 win teams have been selected. 2 years ago there were not enough 6 win teams to fill all of the bowl slots so they had to go this route. They decide which of the 5-7 teams can play based on APR.

(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.

(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.

(10-25-2018 10:01 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(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.

I really want EMU to go to a bowl game again but I prefer it not be the Bahamas. That eliminates a lot of people from being able to go, myself included. The band can't even make that trip.

EMU, CMU, WMU, and Ohio have all been to that game. Time for Toledo, NIU, or another school from the conference to make that trip. I much prefer a game in Alabama or Florida. Hell, Boise might be better.

Did any bowl games go dark this year? Were any bowl games added this year? I feel like the big 10 will not have enough to cover their spot in the quick lane lubber bowl.

That would be ideal for EMU to maybe get some more alums to a game.

https://getsomemaction.com/news/2018/5/3...edule.aspx

(10-25-2018 11:24 AM)TheWoodenNickle Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 10:01 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(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.

I really want EMU to go to a bowl game again but I prefer it not be the Bahamas. That eliminates a lot of people from being able to go, myself included. The band can't even make that trip.

EMU, CMU, WMU, and Ohio have all been to that game. Time for Toledo, NIU, or another school from the conference to make that trip. I much prefer a game in Alabama or Florida. Hell, Boise might be better.

Boise in December! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Anything else fine.

(10-25-2018 11:56 AM)EagleTough Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 11:24 AM)TheWoodenNickle Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 10:01 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(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.

I really want EMU to go to a bowl game again but I prefer it not be the Bahamas. That eliminates a lot of people from being able to go, myself included. The band can't even make that trip.

EMU, CMU, WMU, and Ohio have all been to that game. Time for Toledo, NIU, or another school from the conference to make that trip. I much prefer a game in Alabama or Florida. Hell, Boise might be better.

Boise in December! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Anything else fine.

Great to get some skiing in!