(12-04-2019 10:02 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  Is anyone complaining that Wisconsin and Oregon, the likely Rose Bowl teams, will each probably have three losses, including dropping games to mediocre teams like Illinois or Arizona State, respectively? Or that the likely SEC rep in the Sugar Bowl will have lost to a 4-8 South Carolina team? To think that the non-playoff games are, or should, be based on some sort of meritocracy ignores the fact that the P5 conferences have contracts with the New Year's 6 games specifically to ensure that their top teams who don't make the playoff get the exposure that comes with those games without having to worry about having their spots snagged by more 'deserving' teams.

No, because Virginia lost to Louisville *and* Miami and their best wins are Virginia Tech/Pitt while...

Georgia beat Auburn/Florida/Notre Dame
Wisconsin beat Minnesota/Michigan by 3 TD's plus Iowa

So you're talking teams with *half* the bad losses as Virginia and wins that are in a different stratosphere.

(12-04-2019 11:04 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 10:02 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  Is anyone complaining that Wisconsin and Oregon, the likely Rose Bowl teams, will each probably have three losses, including dropping games to mediocre teams like Illinois or Arizona State, respectively? Or that the likely SEC rep in the Sugar Bowl will have lost to a 4-8 South Carolina team? To think that the non-playoff games are, or should, be based on some sort of meritocracy ignores the fact that the P5 conferences have contracts with the New Year's 6 games specifically to ensure that their top teams who don't make the playoff get the exposure that comes with those games without having to worry about having their spots snagged by more 'deserving' teams.

No, because Virginia lost to Louisville *and* Miami and their best wins are Virginia Tech/Pitt while...

Georgia beat Auburn/Florida/Notre Dame
Wisconsin beat Minnesota/Michigan by 3 TD's plus Iowa

So you're talking teams with *half* the bad losses as Virginia and wins that are in a different stratosphere.

I'll grant you that UVa's loss to Miami was bad but Louisville finished 2nd in their division and was much better than expected. Nonetheless, what is the alternative you'd propose short of giving Notre Dame the ACC's contractual slot? If the Irish want to be guaranteed a New Year's Six slot then they can join the ACC as a full member. Otherwise, they'll have to live with possibility that they won't get an Orange Bowl bid in years where they get beat by both a Georgia squad who lost to South Carolina and by the aforementioned Michigan team that got shellacked by both Wisconsin and tOSU

(12-04-2019 10:57 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 10:02 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  Based on the CFP rankings last night it seems pretty clear that the Orange Bowl will be Virginia vs. Florida regardless of the outcome of the ACC CG, given Alabama's huge drop. I don't understand everyone getting the vapors about the ACC and the Orange Bowl. Is anyone complaining that Wisconsin and Oregon, the likely Rose Bowl teams, will each probably have three losses, including dropping games to mediocre teams like Illinois or Arizona State, respectively? Or that the likely SEC rep in the Sugar Bowl will have lost to a 4-8 South Carolina team?

Those concerns are qualitatively different than an *unranked* team playing in an NY6 bowl. Can't remember the last time that happened?

UConn in the BCS-era Fiesta Bowl? In any event, UVA is ranked #23 as of last night and I doubt the committee would drop them out of the top 25 altogether even if they lose to Clemson by 4+ touchdown spread precisely because they’ll want a matchup of ranked teams in the Orange Bowl.

Exactly. I’m hoping for a close game, mainly so people will stop crying about it.

(12-04-2019 11:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 10:02 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  Based on the CFP rankings last night it seems pretty clear that the Orange Bowl will be Virginia vs. Florida regardless of the outcome of the ACC CG, given Alabama's huge drop. I don't understand everyone getting the vapors about the ACC and the Orange Bowl. Is anyone complaining that Wisconsin and Oregon, the likely Rose Bowl teams, will each probably have three losses, including dropping games to mediocre teams like Illinois or Arizona State, respectively? Or that the likely SEC rep in the Sugar Bowl will have lost to a 4-8 South Carolina team?

Those concerns are qualitatively different than an *unranked* team playing in an NY6 bowl. Can't remember the last time that happened?

This was under the BCS system, but 2012 Wisconsin went to the Rose Bowl as an unranked Big Ten champ.

If the Rose Bowl came up to the Big Ten that year with the proposals that are being batted around regarding the Orange Bowl and ACC, the Big Ten would have told them to *F**k off", show them a long list of other bowls that would happily take an unranked Big Ten champ for even more money, and that would have been the end of it... and that's the Rose Bowl. I would expect the ACC to have a similar reaction.

Putting this aside, absolutely no one wants this type of precedent. If UVA could be knocked out of the Orange Bowl with some type of discretionary change, then what's next? Downgrading a Wake Forest team that wins the ACC Championship but doesn't have as many traveling fans?

Eh, Wisky won the B1G in 2012 because two teams ahead of them in actual results, Ohio State and Penn State, were on Tressel and Sandusky probation. They actually finished in 3rd place in their own division that year, so obviously this didn't reflect general B1G strength the way UVA's result does this year.

Second, the B1G could take that stance because the B1G is just a lot more powerful than the ACC. That's reflected in many things, such as the B1G's much larger media deal, and the fact that the OB pays the B1G the same money as it does the ACC for a team lower-down in the B1G bowl hierarchy. If you have more power, you can talk bigger and tougher and get away with it.

Third, at least in my proposal, the only circumstances in which the OB could take ND over the ACC team is if (a) the ACC team is unranked, and (b) is not the ACC champ, and © Notre Dame is ranked. All three conditions would have to be met, and the money would still go to the ACC, with ND getting just a normal ACC share of it. The ACC champ would always still be guaranteed the OB spot.

That, IMO, is reasonable, and it reflects the power-status of the ACC. And yes, I understand that what I think is reasonable doesn't mean squat outside this forum or hell even on this forum.

(12-04-2019 10:57 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 10:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 10:02 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  Based on the CFP rankings last night it seems pretty clear that the Orange Bowl will be Virginia vs. Florida regardless of the outcome of the ACC CG, given Alabama's huge drop. I don't understand everyone getting the vapors about the ACC and the Orange Bowl. Is anyone complaining that Wisconsin and Oregon, the likely Rose Bowl teams, will each probably have three losses, including dropping games to mediocre teams like Illinois or Arizona State, respectively? Or that the likely SEC rep in the Sugar Bowl will have lost to a 4-8 South Carolina team?

Those concerns are qualitatively different than an *unranked* team playing in an NY6 bowl. Can't remember the last time that happened?

UConn in the BCS-era Fiesta Bowl? In any event, UVA is ranked #23 as of last night and I doubt the committee would drop them out of the top 25 altogether even if they lose to Clemson by 4+ touchdown spread precisely because they’ll want a matchup of ranked teams in the Orange Bowl.

WVU was #23 at 9-3 in OB 2012.

(12-04-2019 11:04 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 10:02 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  Is anyone complaining that Wisconsin and Oregon, the likely Rose Bowl teams, will each probably have three losses, including dropping games to mediocre teams like Illinois or Arizona State, respectively? Or that the likely SEC rep in the Sugar Bowl will have lost to a 4-8 South Carolina team? To think that the non-playoff games are, or should, be based on some sort of meritocracy ignores the fact that the P5 conferences have contracts with the New Year's 6 games specifically to ensure that their top teams who don't make the playoff get the exposure that comes with those games without having to worry about having their spots snagged by more 'deserving' teams.

No, because Virginia lost to Louisville *and* Miami and their best wins are Virginia Tech/Pitt while...

Georgia beat Auburn/Florida/Notre Dame
Wisconsin beat Minnesota/Michigan by 3 TD's plus Iowa

So you're talking teams with *half* the bad losses as Virginia and wins that are in a different stratosphere.

What makes Louisville and Miami "bad" losses? They are both bowl-eligible teams (South Carolina is not). Not trying to argue that UVa is better than Georgia (they'll get a chance to play that out soon enough - 9/7/2020 in Atlanta), just saying that sometime "good" wins and "bad" losses are pretty arbitrary.

What makes people think that UVa will not be able to sell OB tickets? Part of bowl travel and sales today is the end location and the bowl fatigue of the fan base. The UVa alums I know are about piss all over themselves to go to Miami. They just want to get out of Charlotte in one piece. The other side of the stadium will be easily filled with either Florida or Penn State. This is foolish.

(12-04-2019 04:47 PM)Statefan Wrote:  What makes people think that UVa will not be able to sell OB tickets? Part of bowl travel and sales today is the end location and the bowl fatigue of the fan base. The UVa alums I know are about piss all over themselves to go to Miami. They just want to get out of Charlotte in one piece. The other side of the stadium will be easily filled with either Florida or Penn State. This is foolish.

The sample size for UVa bowl games of late isn't great, the 2017 outing was against Navy, in Annapolis, in frigid weather. The 2018 Belk Bowl did have an uptick in attendance of 15,000 over 2017, but I'd imagine a significant chunk of that was from South Carolina fans who made the short drive up I-77 from Columbia. I would suspect that a warm-weather New Year's vacation including the Orange Bowl would be enticing to UVa fans, though there may be some people who don't want to go another game at the Dolphins' stadium since Virginia played at Miami this season. UVa's living alumni is a little shy of a quarter million folks, which is on par with VT so it shouldn't be pure numbers issues.

UVA vs Florida sounds unappealing...

I believe people give ACC to much credit for their contract bowl status, this is all determined by ESPN, like it is with almost every bowl.

Everyone in the league rides on the coattails of Clemson and FSU (when they are good).

The SEC, Big Ten, and PAC 12 all have a whole lot more history and rapport with their primary bowl tie in than the OB ACC relationship which dates to the 90’s.

(12-04-2019 08:22 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The SEC, Big Ten, and PAC 12 all have a whole lot more history and rapport with their primary bowl tie in than the OB ACC relationship which dates to the 90’s.

Actually, the ACC had the original Orange Bowl contract back in the 50’s.

(12-04-2019 05:19 PM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 04:47 PM)Statefan Wrote:  What makes people think that UVa will not be able to sell OB tickets? Part of bowl travel and sales today is the end location and the bowl fatigue of the fan base. The UVa alums I know are about piss all over themselves to go to Miami. They just want to get out of Charlotte in one piece. The other side of the stadium will be easily filled with either Florida or Penn State. This is foolish.

The sample size for UVa bowl games of late isn't great, the 2017 outing was against Navy, in Annapolis, in frigid weather. The 2018 Belk Bowl did have an uptick in attendance of 15,000 over 2017, but I'd imagine a significant chunk of that was from South Carolina fans who made the short drive up I-77 from Columbia. I would suspect that a warm-weather New Year's vacation including the Orange Bowl would be enticing to UVa fans, though there may be some people who don't want to go another game at the Dolphins' stadium since Virginia played at Miami this season. UVa's living alumni is a little shy of a quarter million folks, which is on par with VT so it shouldn't be pure numbers issues.

You'd imagine wrong. Most of the South Carolina fans I know and read online were not excited about playing in Charlotte for the second straight year (season opener in 2017 was in Charlotte) and knowing they would be right back there to open the 2019 season. South Carolina fans have Charlotte fatigue.

Not to mention the fact they were limping into the game losing to Florida and Clemson while getting wins over Chattanooga and Akron.

This is seriously one of the dumbest threads I've ever read on any sports messageboard

Golden star for posters that bend logic like a magician

(12-04-2019 08:25 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 08:22 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The SEC, Big Ten, and PAC 12 all have a whole lot more history and rapport with their primary bowl tie in than the OB ACC relationship which dates to the 90’s.

Actually, the ACC had the original Orange Bowl contract back in the 50’s.

Yep, Duke and their pushing of the 800 SAT rule killed the tie in.

(12-01-2019 10:53 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  4-14

That’s the ACC’s record in OOC P5 games. That’s a worse win percentage than what the MWC and the AAC had against the P5. Defenders of the ACC isn’t that bad narrative please try to explain how this is not mediocrity.

Its not mediocrity its abject failure.

(12-04-2019 04:17 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 11:04 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 10:02 AM)CarlSmithCenter Wrote:  Is anyone complaining that Wisconsin and Oregon, the likely Rose Bowl teams, will each probably have three losses, including dropping games to mediocre teams like Illinois or Arizona State, respectively? Or that the likely SEC rep in the Sugar Bowl will have lost to a 4-8 South Carolina team? To think that the non-playoff games are, or should, be based on some sort of meritocracy ignores the fact that the P5 conferences have contracts with the New Year's 6 games specifically to ensure that their top teams who don't make the playoff get the exposure that comes with those games without having to worry about having their spots snagged by more 'deserving' teams.

No, because Virginia lost to Louisville *and* Miami and their best wins are Virginia Tech/Pitt while...

Georgia beat Auburn/Florida/Notre Dame
Wisconsin beat Minnesota/Michigan by 3 TD's plus Iowa

So you're talking teams with *half* the bad losses as Virginia and wins that are in a different stratosphere.

What makes Louisville and Miami "bad" losses? They are both bowl-eligible teams (South Carolina is not). Not trying to argue that UVa is better than Georgia (they'll get a chance to play that out soon enough - 9/7/2020 in Atlanta), just saying that sometime "good" wins and "bad" losses are pretty arbitrary.

Miami being 6-6 with losses to the likes of FIU make it a bad loss.

Louisville was an incredibly mediocre 7-5. Notice we just got goomba stomped by a decidedly average Kentucky team.

(12-04-2019 08:25 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 08:22 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The SEC, Big Ten, and PAC 12 all have a whole lot more history and rapport with their primary bowl tie in than the OB ACC relationship which dates to the 90’s.

Actually, the ACC had the original Orange Bowl contract back in the 50’s.

Are you sure it was a contract? The ACC did play in several OB's in the 50s, but the SEC did so as well in the 40s.

IIRC, the first actual contractual tie-in was with the Big 8 in the late 1960s.

(12-05-2019 07:34 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 08:25 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 08:22 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The SEC, Big Ten, and PAC 12 all have a whole lot more history and rapport with their primary bowl tie in than the OB ACC relationship which dates to the 90’s.

Actually, the ACC had the original Orange Bowl contract back in the 50’s.

Are you sure it was a contract? The ACC did play in several OB's in the 50s, but the SEC did so as well in the 40s.

IIRC, the first actual contractual tie-in was with the Big 8 in the late 1960s.

Yeah, there were five straight or something. Statefan knows more about it.

BTW, Orange Bowls won, by conference (affiliation at time game was played)

Big 8 .............. 20

SEC ............... 18

Independent .... 14

ACC ............... 13

SWC ............... 4

Big 12 ............. 4

B1G ................ 4

PAC ................. 4

Big East ........... 3

(12-02-2019 08:31 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Rest assured the Orange Bowl much prefers being "stuck" with UVA from the ACC than they would be getting forced to take the G5 rep every couple of years.

They would, but also rest assured they'd rather be able to take Notre Dame than any ACC team not named Clemson or Florida State (and arguably they'd take them over Florida State). The ACC absolutely should not willingly allow ND to have that spot, but it wouldn't stun me if the next contract negotiation they insist on having the ability to select ND under circumstances.