Could a 5-7 UT still make a bowl?

#102
#102
G0V0LS33 said:
EE's and our young team needs the extra work. Needed yes but not gonna happen. Wanna bowl then should have beaten Vanderbilt IMO
Click to expand...

I'd say that's pretty much a fact and not an opinion.

UT had it's shot to get to a bowl and couldn't get it done against Vandy.
 
#104
#104
bamawriter said:
Not to flame, but I am curious:

If UT were to get a bowl invite, would anyone on here really be thrilled about traveling to Birmingham a couple of days after New Year's to watch a 5-7 team take on Pittsburg? Or Shreveport a couple of days before New Year's? Would anyone really dedicate the money to do that? Just curious...
Click to expand...

Bham you bet I would! I couldn't before Christmas most likely though due to my job.
 
#107
#107
warhammer said:
I guess we're to everyone getting a trophy.
Click to expand...

If everyone got invited to a bcs Bowl I'd agree with you but other than those, who cares? They're about money. The extra practice is really what matters. Something all teams should have access to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#108
#108
CNCVol88 said:
If everyone got invited to a bcs Bowl I'd agree with you but other than those, who cares? They're about money. The extra practice is really what matters. Something all teams should have access to.
Click to expand...

There's nothing like the celebration of mediocrity or those who fall just short of it.
 
#109
#109
#110
#110
I didn't read this whole thread, but if the NCAA is about fairness (thus its role as the rule enforcing governing body) how can they deny any teams practice? To me it should be allowed that all teams get the same practice time regardless of bowl eligibility or not. Think of the plethora of recruiting rules that are intended to make sure that schools have even footing, why should the times that teams practice be any different. If practice makes a team better, allowing the better teams to practice means that you are denying the less successful teams exactly what they need in favor of the successful teams getting more of what they don't. How is that fair? It's like Title IX, in reverse.

It doesn't stop there.

The arbitrary record threshold is ridiculous. Are all 6-6 teams the same? If polls have meaning (if not why do we have them) then the higher ranked teams should beat the lower ranked teams, right? So, a team could be the 8th best team in the land, and have 7 losses if they played the top 7 teams. In our current system, in this hypothesis, the 8th best team in the land, wouldn't be ranked, would get shunned from every bowl, and would be denied practice time given to other teams who chose an easier road. All the bowl system does, contrary to stated intent, is to benefit teams who play weak schedules and punish those with difficult schedules.

How can anyone penalize a team for losing to a better team? Conversely how can we praise a team, for beating inferior opponents? Shouldn't the paradigm be to find a way to determine how good teams are at stasis (what a pre-season poll should be looking for), then judge them not on record, but based on over or under-performance? Meaning teams move up the rankings if they beat who they should and those they shouldn't. Teams move down the rankings if they lose to who they should and those they shouldn't. A team that wins against those they should, and loses to those they should, stays stagnant in the ratings. The end result should be success or failure based on ability, not on schedule.

Sorry for the rant.

EDIT: It's late, but my comment intrigued me. I took my theory above and tried to see if I could make a reasonable ranking of teams in the SEC. I started with the SEC teams rated by recruiting averages (predict outcome about 70% of the time) and formed a ranking that is best viewed as a ladder with rungs. Based on this ladder, and my chart that shows how talent predicts seasons (roughly), I then graded the teams based on either stagnation, or over or under performance (see: https://docs.google.com/a/mybloodis...yfdEpwUHpyWXUzY3JWRFU1Skc1UTRiZ2c&output=html)

I pushed the teams with a SEC seasonal performance of +/- 0 over to the same rung, I took the teams who under performed and moved them down the number of rungs of the games they under performed, did the opposite with over performing teams, when two teams ended up on the same rung by over or under performance, the team who won the head to head match up took the higher rung. It turned out like the chart below. Not definitive, but certainly an interesting starting point as a way to formulate a more objective evaluation of the actual ranking of teams other than pure record which relies too heavily on looking "good" by playing poor teams (as discussed above).

If this is confusing, I apologize. I am really tired.
 

Attachments

  • Book1.jpg
    Book1.jpg
    49.3 KB · Views: 6
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#116
#116
1orangews6 said:
A bowl invite is meant to be a reward. What type of reward does our team deserve for having a losing season. Since we're getting personal and all with "who am I" type BS. You must be one of those people that believe that everyone should be a winner and everyone gets a trophy just for playing. Winning is awesome and losing sucks but it builds unity and character of a team. Our team shouldn't be rewarded for a losing season and besides it doesn't matter what fans think there are too many 6-6 team than there are bowl games so UT won't be playing in a bowl this year.
Click to expand...

Its not a personal issue - people who decide bowls dont give a crap who you are or me either - and they dont do it because they think they are going to "reward" some team for all its hard work. They do it to make the max money they can - that is their JOB. So if they see an opportunity to boost attendance/viewership, etc within the rules that they all adhere to, they will take it.

And IMHO the only "bowls" that matter are the conference championships and the top BCS bowls that decide #1. Everything else is just to have some more football to watch for the fans and a way to make money for the Bowl sponsors.

Its not about our guys DESERVING a bowl bid, its about me wanting them to have it so they can get better for next year. Can you call yourself a VFL and NOT want that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#117
#117
Gandalf said:
Its not a personal issue - people who decide bowls dont give a crap who you are or me either - and they dont do it because they think they are going to "reward" some team for all its hard work. They do it to make the max money they can - that is their JOB. So if they see an opportunity to boost attendance/viewership, etc within the rules that they all adhere to, they will take it.

And IMHO the only "bowls" that matter are the conference championships and the top BCS bowls that decide #1. Everything else is just to have some more football to watch for the fans and a way to make money for the Bowl sponsors.

Its not about our guys DESERVING a bowl bid, its about me wanting them to have it so they can get better for next year. Can you call yourself a VFL and NOT want that?
Click to expand...

You have your opinion and I have mine. If there are more 6-6 teams than there are bowl games then they aren't going to take a 5-7 team like UT. Teams with LOSING seasons don't get to go to post season games. You can throw the money thing in as much as you want it's not going to happen.
 
#118
#118
BigOrangeTrain said:
We should get to go to a bowl game over a team like Louisville.
Click to expand...

Really? A 5-7 team should go to a bowl over a 10-1 team? I would love to go a bowl game this year but we didn't earn it. Now are there some 6-6 teams we should go over, probably but it's not gonna happen.
 
#119
#119
volfan_89 said:
Really? A 5-7 team should go to a bowl over a 10-1 team? I would love to go a bowl game this year but we didn't earn it. Now are there some 6-6 teams we should go over, probably but it's not gonna happen.
Click to expand...

Teams that play a schedule like Louisville does not deserve to be ranked or be invited to a bowl game. Ever. We didn't earn it but neither did many teams who are going to a bowl.
 
#120
#120
BigOrangeTrain said:
Teams that play a schedule like Louisville does not deserve to be ranked or be invited to a bowl game. Ever. We didn't earn it but neither did many teams who are going to a bowl.
Click to expand...

The way the college football bowl system is set up it rewards mediocrity. Louisville doesn't deserve a BCS bowl and hopefully they won't go to one. OSU doesn't deserve to go to the BCS title game but likely will unless they lose. You can't blame a team for playing a weaker schedule when the system rewards them for it.
 
#121
#121
BigOrangeTrain said:
We should get to go to a bowl game over a team like Louisville.
Click to expand...

I've never seen something so stupid as this.

Louisville is 10-1, has a decent chance to go 11-1, and is in the Top 25. They've also had recent history winning the Orange Bowl and last year winning the Sugar Bowl, and are a league ahead of UT and half the SEC for that matter.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top