11/29 Scout.com Bowl Predictions:

[Van]

Konica Minolta Gator Bowl
January 1, Jacksonville FL, 1 pm CBS
ACC No. 3 vs. Big East, Big 12, or Notre Dame
Projection: Virginia Tech vs. Cincinnati
So the #5 team gets to play a 3 loss team. Yay! And Cincy will win and cry because they're not #1.

For Cincy to be playing in this game it would mean they lost to Pitt, they're no longer the #5 team, and they sure as fuck won't by crying that they should be #1.

[Van]

Exactly. You just inform TPTB right up front that you absolutely won't go, because you have no business playing in a bowl game.

[Van]

My favorite story of the season though had to be K State. When they played Nebraska, a win would've given them the Big XII North title. A loss knocks them out of any bowl, due to the fact that their having played two D1-AA teams meant they wouldn't have six wins against D1 teams.

A team which wasn't even bowl eligible - when more than half of all D1 teams will go to bowl games - was in position to win the Big XII North.

Beautiful.

[Vito Corleone]

My favorite story of the season though had to be K State. When they played Nebraska, a win would've given them the Big XII North title. A loss knocks them out of any bowl, due to the fact that their having played two D1-AA teams meant they wouldn't have six wins against D1 teams.

A team which wasn't even bowl eligible - when more than half of all D1 teams will go to bowl games - was in position to win the Big XII North.

Beautiful.

No that's KSU, a team notorious for scheduling like that. I'm actually really glad this happened to them, I hope it serves as a lesson for scheduling like a bunch of pussies.

I'm sure someone is going to read my post and come back talking about Texas's weak schedule but the fact is Texas was supposed to play Arkansas, and Utah this season but both schools had coaches who pussed out (sup Urban Meyer) We replaced them as best we could, I must say I am looking forward to next season when we play UCLA.

[Van]

I'm sure you are.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Exactly. You just inform TPTB right up front that you absolutely won't go, because you have no business playing in a bowl game.

I'm certainly no fan of all the so-called Tard Bowl games. That being said, under the circumstances it looks like ND is one of the teams that is good enough to go bowling should they want to do so. If ND were to turn down a bowl bid, the only bowl-eligible alternatives that would be available are UCLA, Louisiana-Lafayette and Louisiana-Monroe (the latter two out of the Sun Belt Conference). Of course, the people that wrote these projections are assuming that Army loses to Navy and Hawai'i loses to Wisconsin, apparently, both of which would render those teams ineligible for bowl consideration.

Under the circumstances, therefore, I can see why the bowls are interested in ND. And I realize the problems presented by the MAC's particular situation, but I don't see much argument for going to Mobile, AL for a bowl game in ND's case. Detroit actually would make more sense, except possibly for the timing of the game.

[Terry in Crapchester]

GMAC Bowl
January 6, Mobile AL 7 pm ESPN
ACC vs. MAC
Projection: Notre Dame* vs. Ohio
*No ACC team projected available
Nice.

Notre Dame may not be available either.

Notre Dame players have scheduled a players meeting for Monday ... will include a vote on whether the players want to play in a bowl game after a 6-6 season.

WTF? You get invited to a bowl game, you don't take a vote to see if you'll go.

They haven't been invited to a bowl game yet. Perhaps the vote is preemptive in the event that it's a nay vote, so they don't have to embarrass a bowl game.

I do realize that, even with a 6-6 record and an apparently imminent coaching change, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion about any other school in the country. But remember, ND had a flat no bowl games policy until 1970, and believe it or not, there's still a contingent among ND's fanbase (a minority, but a very vocal minority) who would prefer to go back to that.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

All I want for Christmas is a bowl win, but this potential matchup against T. Tech is a lopsided one. That's about the worst team MSU could draw. Their secondary is in complete disarray. Tech could score 80 on them if they tried really hard. Probly 60 if they don't try at all. I don't care what the line is, go all in on the Raiders.

[Mikey]

Not sure how they came up with those seedings, especially for the PAC 10.

Assuming Cal beats Washington, Oregon beats Oregon State, and either SC beats Arizona or Arizona beats SC (one of those is pretty sure to happen) there will be a four way tie for second place at 6-3 in the conference.

I was hoping to see Stanford play in the Holiday Bowl, which is almost always an exciting, high scoring game. I would even consider going to the game.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Not sure how they came up with those seedings, especially for the PAC 10.

Assuming Cal beats Washington, Oregon beats Oregon State, and either SC beats Arizona or Arizona beats SC (one of those is pretty sure to happen) there will be a four way tie for second place at 6-3 in the conference.

I was hoping to see Stanford play in the Holiday Bowl, which is almost always an exciting, high scoring game. I would even consider going to the game.

Bowl games aren't obligated to take the best team in the conference in a progressive linear fashion, not most of the time, anyway.

The bowl bid that goes to the conference champion is obligated to take the conference champion as that champion is determined under the conference's rules. Beyond that, bowl games are limited by two rules: the "one loss" rule; and the "6/7 win rule."

The "one loss" rule provides that a bowl must take the team with the best remaining conference record or a team within one loss of the team with the best remaining conference record. The "6/7 win rule" trumps the "one win" rule and provides that every team with 7+ overall wins must be taken for a bowl game before a bowl can take a team with 6 wins.

Under your scenario, therefore, the only limitation on the bowls is that none of them can take UCLA, unless the Pac-10 happens to get an at-large BCS bid (not real likely to happen this year). The scenario therefore makes sense to me:

Civil War winner to Rose Bowl.
USC to Holiday Bowl (USC would be the biggest draw in that bowl game among the remaining Pac-10 teams).
Civil War loser to Sun Bowl.
Cal to Las Vegas Bowl (Cal beat Stanford head-to-head).
Stanford to Emerald Bowl.
Arizona to Poinsettia Bowl.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Terry, which BCS bowl has the #3 and #4 picks this year? Which game is supposed to be the 2nd highest ranked game?

It depends on who winds up in the BCS game. Assuming Texas wins and the Meatgrinder champ is #1, the picks will look like this:

BCS: Meatgrinder champ vs. Texas (#1 vs. #2)
Big Ten champ and Pac-10 champ to Rose Bowl
ACC champ to Orange Bowl

Remaining teams picked in following order:

1. Sugar
2. Fiesta
3. Orange
4. Sugar
5. Fiesta

[Terry in Crapchester]

There would be 7 teams picked, with two automatically assigned to the Rose Bowl and one automatically assigned to the Orange Bowl. Sugar Bowl would get the #3 and #6 picks.

[Van]

Yes, Texas is fully guilty of Path Of Least Resistance scheduling. They hate to leave their own state, they go out of their way to schedule excessive home games against cupcakes, and between the cupcakes in the Big XII and their lame OOC schedules they basically schedule themselves into a nearly guaranteed ten wins every season.

Last year's Texas team had only the OU win as a marquee win, along with their nailbiter win against Ohio St in the Fiesta. This year's Texas team will go to the national title game as the least tested title game team in recent memory. Since they're not going to beat Florida, exactly what will be their marquee win this season? Nebraska, in a farcical, cash grab game? Paper Tiger Okie St, who were missing their best players? Five loss OU, who were missing theirs? Wyoming? UTEP? Florida Dewey Decimal System? If they could've scheduled Rice three times, they would have.

Forget multiple tough wins, I'm looking for even one on their schedule, and I just don't see it.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Not sure how they came up with those seedings, especially for the PAC 10.

Assuming Cal beats Washington, Oregon beats Oregon State, and either SC beats Arizona or Arizona beats SC (one of those is pretty sure to happen) there will be a four way tie for second place at 6-3 in the conference.

I was hoping to see Stanford play in the Holiday Bowl, which is almost always an exciting, high scoring game. I would even consider going to the game.

Bowl games aren't obligated to take the best team in the conference in a progressive linear fashion, not most of the time, anyway.

The bowl bid that goes to the conference champion is obligated to take the conference champion as that champion is determined under the conference's rules. Beyond that, bowl games are limited by two rules: the "one loss" rule; and the "6/7 win rule."

The "one loss" rule provides that a bowl must take the team with the best remaining conference record or a team within one loss of the team with the best remaining conference record. The "6/7 win rule" trumps the "one win" rule and provides that every team with 7+ overall wins must be taken for a bowl game before a bowl can take a team with 6 wins.

Under your scenario, therefore, the only limitation on the bowls is that none of them can take UCLA, unless the Pac-10 happens to get an at-large BCS bid (not real likely to happen this year). The scenario therefore makes sense to me:

Civil War winner to Rose Bowl.
USC to Holiday Bowl (USC would be the biggest draw in that bowl game among the remaining Pac-10 teams).
Civil War loser to Sun Bowl.
Cal to Las Vegas Bowl (Cal beat Stanford head-to-head).
Stanford to Emerald Bowl.
Arizona to Poinsettia Bowl.

Upon further review, I should modify this somewhat. There's an implicit assumption in there that Oregon beats Oregon State. If that happens, then the Holiday Bowl has its pick of the remaining Pac-10 teams with 7+ wins.

If Oregon State beats Oregon, OTOH, that's not necessarily the case. In that scenario, Oregon and Oregon State tie for the conference title with a 7-2 conference record. Oregon State gets the Rose Bowl bid on the basis of the head-to-head win over Oregon. Oregon then is the top remaining team with a 7-2 conference record. So the Holiday Bowl could take any team with either a 7-2 conference record or a 6-3 conference record. That would eliminate the loser of the Arizona-USC game from consideration for the Holiday Bowl, and also would eliminate Cal if Cal loses to Washington. Stanford's best chance for a Holiday Bowl bid:

Oregon State beats Oregon
Arizona beats USC
Washington beats Cal

In that scenario, the Holiday Bowl could choose between Oregon (7-2 conference record), Arizona (6-3 conference record) or Stanford (6-3 conference record). Cal and USC (both 5-4 conference records) would be eliminated from consideration for the Holiday Bowl. In that scenario, Stanford might get the Holiday Bowl bid on the basis of finishing the season strong, a head-to-head win over Oregon, and closer proximity to San Diego than Oregon.

[Terry in Crapchester]

GMAC Bowl
January 6, Mobile AL 7 pm ESPN
ACC vs. MAC
Projection: Notre Dame* vs. Ohio
*No ACC team projected available
Nice.

Notre Dame may not be available either.

Notre Dame players have scheduled a players meeting for Monday ... will include a vote on whether the players want to play in a bowl game after a 6-6 season.

WTF? You get invited to a bowl game, you don't take a vote to see if you'll go.

They haven't been invited to a bowl game yet. Perhaps the vote is preemptive in the event that it's a nay vote, so they don't have to embarrass a bowl game.

I do realize that, even with a 6-6 record and an apparently imminent coaching change, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion about any other school in the country. But remember, ND had a flat no bowl games policy until 1970, and believe it or not, there's still a contingent among ND's fanbase (a minority, but a very vocal minority) who would prefer to go back to that.

As a follow-up, while I know this isn't definitive, it points toward ND probably accepting a bowl bid. http://www.irishsportsdaily.com/footbal ... y-strabley Of course, there's always a possibility that the particular players interviewed were saying the politically correct thing, or that their opinions don't represent the majority of the team. In any event, under the circumstances, I tend to think that ND gets a bowl bid if they want one.

[indyfrisco]

I had just started to create a thread on the Independence Bowl when I saw this.

In all honesty, I'm hoping for Auburn to play like they did vs. Bama and for A&M to play like they did vs. t.u. That game would likely kick some major ass like the A&M/Miss St. Indy Bowl a few years back. I didn't like the outcome of that game, but it was very entertaining. JaMaar Toombs went off for like 250 yards rushing and something like 4 TDs and then thought he was good enough to go pro. Never drafted. Never played a down in the NFL. Fucker should have come back to A&M one more year.

In any case, I think this game is a coin flip right now. A&M's top 10 offense is so jeckyl and hyde. Against shitty Kansas St. they were anemic and against a tough t.u. D they were outstanding. For both teams, as you said, it just depends on which one shows up. In recent history, which has nothing to do with this year, A&M has laid eggs in the bowl games. Hope it's not the case this year.

[indyfrisco]

I must say I am looking forward to next season when we play UCLA.

66-3 and 49-31. Yeah, there will be blood.

[Dinsdale]

I'm merely guessing, but I think the Holiday would take Furd over the others -- it would look bad if they took USC over the team that mopped the floor with them, in addition to the fact that SC tows the biggest bandwagon in the land -- a bandwagon that Van and Toejam exemplify, what with their jumping of ship and turtling.

Add to that, the Sheepfuckers aren't known for travelling well (and their boosters ain't smart enough to buy up all the tix, so as to at least create the illusion of travelling well... and they wonder why they don't often get invited to the "cool" bowls), and a typical Furd grad has a buncha cash, so I'm guessing Furd to the Holiday (which gets gutted next season in favor of the Alamo, since they just offered way more money for the PAC's #2).

In that scenario, that probably sends Kal to the Emerald, which would sell the most tix... although I'm sure M2 will come up with some sort of "car-lag" take to explain the beating they take.

Although, there might be some "mailing it in" in the PAC this week -- because frankly, not all the players are stupid, and would you rather spend your holiday break in El Paso, or Las Vegas... could be some awfully iffy plays made this week, like shanking kicks, and fumbling and whatnot.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Looks like Auburn accepted a bid to play in the Outback Bowl.

[Terry in Crapchester]

I'm merely guessing, but I think the Holiday would take Furd over the others -- it would look bad if they took USC over the team that mopped the floor with them, in addition to the fact that SC tows the biggest bandwagon in the land -- a bandwagon that Van and Toejam exemplify, what with their jumping of ship and turtling.

The bowl games aren't necessarily about inviting the best team you can get this season. More often, they're about inviting the teams that provide the most attractive matchup within the confines of the rules that exist. USC is the team that has gotten all the ESPN hype/love in recent years, so they're that team, this year. Unless Oregon loses to Oregon State and USC loses to Arizona (in which case the Holiday could not take USC), I don't see any way the Holiday passes on USC.

As for USC's fanbase, at least their alumni base is comparable to ND's, with two notable exceptions:

1. There are more USC alumni than there are ND alumni (student enrollment alone told me so); and
2. Whereas ND's alumni are scattered throughout the country, the overwhelming majority of USC's alumni base is concentrated in the SoCal area.

No doubt there are plenty of bandwagoning USC fans, but that doesn't mean that the team can't represent well at the Holiday Bowl.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Update: ND won't accept any bowl bids this year. http://www.und.com/sports/m-footbl/spec ... 09aaa.html

In light of statements made by certain ND players, query whether Swarbrick overruled the team. In any event, I feel bad for the seniors on the team. A bowl game at least would have given them the possibility of going out with a win, and erasing the career-ending four game losing streak. OTOH, I do understand not wanting to play a bowl game under an interim head coach. In any event, the beneficiary of this decision appears to be UCLA, who is the only other surplus bowl-eligible BCS team.