Bowl-eligible Big Ten team could be left out

Donate To GopherHole
S

SelectionSunday

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
25,245
Reaction score
6,093
Points
113
I know who it should be, but it probably won't. ... Penn State. The Nittany Lions have the worst overall record (6-6, tied with Illinois) of all the bowl-eligible Big Ten teams, and the worst conference record (2-6). If a Big Ten team gets left out, I've got (a mythical) $50 that says either Illinois (6-6, 3-5) or Rutgers (7-5, 3-5) gets the shaft. Probably Illinois.

If it comes to that, Delany should step in (but he probably won't) and say, "Penn State, you take a seat. You already got a break having 2 years wiped of your bowl ban, you can wait another year."

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11979620/big-ten-bowl-eligible-team-miss-postseason
 


I hope Rutgers is the team left out. I'd like to see Illinois get the bid. It's hard not to root for them.

Except when they're spanking the Gophers in the first quarter of a game.
 

SelectionSunday said:
I know who it should be, but it probably won't. ... Penn State. The Nittany Lions have the worst overall record (6-6, tied with Illinois) of all the bowl-eligible Big Ten teams, and the worst conference record (2-6). If a Big Ten team gets left out, I've got (a mythical) $50 that says either Illinois (6-6, 3-5) or Rutgers (7-5, 3-5) gets hosed. Probably Illinois.

If it comes to that, Delany should step in (but you know it won't) and say, Penn State, you take a seat. You already got a break having 2 years wiped of your bowl ban, you can wait another year.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11979620/big-ten-bowl-eligible-team-miss-postseason
Click to expand...

I referenced this in another thread last night - I cannot figure out how a Big Ten team would be left out. The only vacancies will be from the Big 12 (assuming Oklahoma State loses to Oklahoma), coming in the Cactus Bowl (#6) and Armed Forces Bowl (secondary tie-in). The Cactus Bowl automatically gets the Mountain West's #2 selection if the Big 12 cannot fill its spot, which would open a spot in the New Orleans Bowl (if Boise goes to the Fiesta Bowl), but that will be taken by a Conference USA secondary agreement, giving C-USA six bowl teams.

Unless the Armed Forces Bowl has another tie-in with the MAC or C-USA (it has a C-USA tie-in down the road, but according to C-USA's website, not in 2014), that bowl should have an opening for either a Big Ten team or an SEC team - depending on which league does not get a third team in an access bowl.
 

afurry91 said:
I hope Rutgers is the team left out. I'd like to see Illinois get the bid. It's hard not to root for them.

Except when they're spanking the Gophers in the first quarter of a game.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this completely furry.

Over on SB Nation, I have enjoyed the writing and other things the guys over at the Champaign Room do, so I am definitely rooting for them.
 


I think it should be Penn State, but I don't want the sanctions considered. At the end of the day, regardless of our thoughts on the fairness of removing the bowl sanction, I would have a major problem with saying "well, you are on no punishment with regards to bowl eligibility, but we are going to punish you by using that to deny you an spot in a bowl this year." The 2-6 record should be the beginning and end of the discussion. Going 2-6 against your conference peers is a crap season. My hope with the conference expansion was that getting to 6 wins wouldn't be enough to get you there automatically, and that we could start rejecting people who beat whatever chumps they scheduled out of conference and only won 25% of their games against the B1G. Leaving out Rutgers would be a travesty. Better overall record and better conference record than PSU? They earned it.
 

They won't leave out Rutgers in their first year.
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
I think it should be Penn State, but I don't want the sanctions considered. At the end of the day, regardless of our thoughts on the fairness of removing the bowl sanction, I would have a major problem with saying "well, you are on no punishment with regards to bowl eligibility, but we are going to punish you by using that to deny you an spot in a bowl this year." The 2-6 record should be the beginning and end of the discussion. Going 2-6 against your conference peers is a crap season. My hope with the conference expansion was that getting to 6 wins wouldn't be enough to get you there automatically, and that we could start rejecting people who beat whatever chumps they scheduled out of conference and only won 25% of their games against the B1G. Leaving out Rutgers would be a travesty. Better overall record and better conference record than PSU? They earned it.
Click to expand...

Illinois beat PSU head to head AND finished 3-5 to PSU's 2-6 in conference. If anyone is left out, it should be Penn State.
 




No team with a 2-6 CR should ever go to a bowl game. EVER. That includes Minnesota. As Grandma Marg used to say, "ish".
 

e.bigelow said:
Illinois beat PSU head to head AND finished 3-5 to PSU's 2-6 in conference. If anyone is left out, it should be Penn State.
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree, it definitely should be Penn State. I am just saying I want it to be for the reasons you listed, not because someone is trying to enforce a sanction that has purportedly been removed.
 

highwayman said:
No team with a 2-6 CR should ever go to a bowl game. EVER. That includes Minnesota. As Grandma Marg used to say, "ish".
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I think the bowl eligibility should be changed to make that a requirement. The focus being on 6 total wins is absurd if that means that teams are free to get to 2/3 of that total by simply scheduling a OOC slate of total cupcakes.
 

Nate said:
They won't leave out Rutgers in their first year.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The whole point of bringing those teams in was to increase market share. If they can put Rutgers in a bowl in year one, they'll do it. I can't imagine the B1G would miss that opportunity to make adding Rutgers a success story.
 



I think the B1G should leave Penn State out permanently.
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
Absolutely. I think the bowl eligibility should be changed to make that a requirement. The focus being on 6 total wins is absurd if that means that teams are free to get to 2/3 of that total by simply scheduling a OOC slate of total cupcakes.
Click to expand...

Might want to get off the high horse for a second. Pretty sure that was us for about 15 years straight trying to redeem bad seasons into bad bowl games with as few conference wins as possible and putting teams like SDSU on the schedule. Also you could argue that you should reward the teams in power conferences for at least playing 8 games (4 great, 4 good opponents) and winning two because there are teams who play 2 good (0 great) games a year that lose both and still expect to get into bowl games with 7-5 records.
 


LakerFan said:
Might want to get off the high horse for a second. Pretty sure that was us for about 15 years straight trying to redeem bad seasons into bad bowl games with as few conference wins as possible and putting teams like SDSU on the schedule. Also you could argue that you should reward the teams in power conferences for at least playing 8 games (4 great, 4 good opponents) and winning two because there are teams who play 2 good (0 great) games a year that lose both and still expect to get into bowl games with 7-5 records.
Click to expand...

It was us. And our 2-6 bowl teams were bad teams.
 



Jike Spingleton said:
More proof the Armed Forces Bowl will have an at-large opening if the Big Ten needs it: they were lobbying for Air Force as an at-large earlier in the week.

http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_27041066/armed-forces-bowl-prefers-invite-air-force-falcons

Also, this game rotates into the Big Ten lineup next season, so there is already an existing relationship.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the contractual agreement alternating the Heart of Dallas and the Armed Forces Bowl prohibits the "off" team from selecting a B1G team even as an at-large.
 

LakerFan said:
Might want to get off the high horse for a second. Pretty sure that was us for about 15 years straight trying to redeem bad seasons into bad bowl games with as few conference wins as possible and putting teams like SDSU on the schedule. Also you could argue that you should reward the teams in power conferences for at least playing 8 games (4 great, 4 good opponents) and winning two because there are teams who play 2 good (0 great) games a year that lose both and still expect to get into bowl games with 7-5 records.
Click to expand...

While the Gophers have certainly benefited from playing non-conference cupcakes, I count one season (2012) in which we were bowl eligible after winning only two conference games.
 


All in, so a little more money for everyone
 

GopherOhana said:
All in, so a little more money for everyone
Click to expand...

As I pointed out at the top of the thread, there was never any threat of a Big Ten team being left out. The Armed Forces Bowl always had an opening, and because the committee moved Mississippi State up in the rankings, it was the ACC with the extra team. And surprise, surprise - Pitt went to the AF Bowl.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom