Ok the Bowl thing is officially out of hand

[JohnStOnge]

The later bowls that match Power 5 teams with winning records from different Power 5 conferences are more interesting. Like some y'all mentioned. LSU vs. Texas Tech was interesting not only because I live in the Baton Rouge area but because you had Leonard Fournette playing against a team that gave up 317 yards rushing at 6.9 yards per carry to Sam Houston State. You had to wonder if Fournette might get 300 yards. That would've made a good over/under bet. It was under. But he did average 7.3 yards per carry while LSU as a team averaged 9.6.

North Carolina vs. Baylor was an interesting match up too. And OMGosh Baylor rushed for 645 yards. I don't know if I've ever seen anything like that.

Now Texas A&M vs. Louisville is on and USC vs. Wisconsin is interesting too.

But basically the interesting Bowl games have just started to happen over the past few days. These games are "bragging rights" games between teams from conferences that are actually relevant in the top level of college football. Conferences that actually ARE the top level of college football rather than conferences composed of wannabe programs trying to pretend they're at that level.

[BDKJMU]

First one because of the TTU Pom-Pom Squad

Second one because the Over/Under is 100

To be honest, no I probably wouldn't have driven to Houston to watch a Tech/LSU game if my daughter wasn't on the TTU Pom Squad.

But I went to the Alamo Bowl last year and had a blast. Expect I'll have a blast this year too....

And no, I probably won't be driving to Frisco. THAT drive is a **** bitch. I-35 is perpetually under construction and a 250 mile drive takes about 6-7 hours. No thanks.

http://www.depts.ttu.edu/centerforcampu ... nt_pom.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Grizalltheway]

Stalking Z's daughter now, are we?

[AshevilleApp]

The later bowls that match Power 5 teams with winning records from different Power 5 conferences are more interesting. Like some y'all mentioned. LSU vs. Texas Tech was interesting not only because I live in the Baton Rouge area but because you had Leonard Fournette playing against a team that gave up 317 yards rushing at 6.9 yards per carry to Sam Houston State. You had to wonder if Fournette might get 300 yards. That would've made a good over/under bet. It was under. But he did average 7.3 yards per carry while LSU as a team averaged 9.6.

North Carolina vs. Baylor was an interesting match up too. And OMGosh Baylor rushed for 645 yards. I don't know if I've ever seen anything like that.

Now Texas A&M vs. Louisville is on and USC vs. Wisconsin is interesting too.

But basically the interesting Bowl games have just started to happen over the past few days. These games are "bragging rights" games between teams from conferences that are actually relevant in the top level of college football. Conferences that actually ARE the top level of college football rather than conferences composed of wannabe programs trying to pretend they're at that level.

Did you have a problem with the Small College Bowl games prior to the I-A, I-AA, D-2 split?

[Baldy]

The later bowls that match Power 5 teams with winning records from different Power 5 conferences are more interesting. Like some y'all mentioned. LSU vs. Texas Tech was interesting not only because I live in the Baton Rouge area but because you had Leonard Fournette playing against a team that gave up 317 yards rushing at 6.9 yards per carry to Sam Houston State. You had to wonder if Fournette might get 300 yards. That would've made a good over/under bet. It was under. But he did average 7.3 yards per carry while LSU as a team averaged 9.6.

North Carolina vs. Baylor was an interesting match up too. And OMGosh Baylor rushed for 645 yards. I don't know if I've ever seen anything like that.

Now Texas A&M vs. Louisville is on and USC vs. Wisconsin is interesting too.

But basically the interesting Bowl games have just started to happen over the past few days. These games are "bragging rights" games between teams from conferences that are actually relevant in the top level of college football. Conferences that actually ARE the top level of college football rather than conferences composed of wannabe programs trying to pretend they're at that level.

Those two games were boring blowouts. Texas Tech doesn't play defense and LSU is overrated. The only good game yesterday was one nobody saw, Wisconsin vs USC.

The Camellia Bowl was a much better game...App kicking a last second field goal to win. The Las Vegas Bowl was better too. Seeing BYU come back from a 35-0 deficit to almost pull it off. Hell, even the GoDaddy was better. Watching Georgia Southern use it's famous ground game to totally dismantle a so-called high powered passing attack.

You need to get out more John...expand your horizons.

[AZGrizFan]

The later bowls that match Power 5 teams with winning records from different Power 5 conferences are more interesting. Like some y'all mentioned. LSU vs. Texas Tech was interesting not only because I live in the Baton Rouge area but because you had Leonard Fournette playing against a team that gave up 317 yards rushing at 6.9 yards per carry to Sam Houston State. You had to wonder if Fournette might get 300 yards. That would've made a good over/under bet. It was under. But he did average 7.3 yards per carry while LSU as a team averaged 9.6.

North Carolina vs. Baylor was an interesting match up too. And OMGosh Baylor rushed for 645 yards. I don't know if I've ever seen anything like that.

Now Texas A&M vs. Louisville is on and USC vs. Wisconsin is interesting too.

But basically the interesting Bowl games have just started to happen over the past few days. These games are "bragging rights" games between teams from conferences that are actually relevant in the top level of college football. Conferences that actually ARE the top level of college football rather than conferences composed of wannabe programs trying to pretend they're at that level.

Those two games were boring blowouts. Texas Tech doesn't play defense and LSU is overrated. The only good game yesterday was one nobody saw, Wisconsin vs USC.

The Camellia Bowl was a much better game...App kicking a last second field goal to win. The Las Vegas Bowl was better too. Seeing BYU come back from a 35-0 deficit to almost pull it off. Hell, even the GoDaddy was better. Watching Georgia Southern use it's famous ground game to totally dismantle a so-called high powered passing attack.

You need to get out more John...expand your horizons.

Come on now. TTU/LSU was 28-20 in the latter half of the 3rd quarter, and TTU was driving to tie, but got intercepted in the end zone. After THAT it became a blowout, but it was anything but boring for 3 quarters.

[AZGrizFan]

To be honest, no I probably wouldn't have driven to Houston to watch a Tech/LSU game if my daughter wasn't on the TTU Pom Squad.

But I went to the Alamo Bowl last year and had a blast. Expect I'll have a blast this year too....

And no, I probably won't be driving to Frisco. THAT drive is a **** bitch. I-35 is perpetually under construction and a 250 mile drive takes about 6-7 hours. No thanks.

http://www.depts.ttu.edu/centerforcampu ... nt_pom.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes?

[AshevilleApp]

http://www.depts.ttu.edu/centerforcampu ... nt_pom.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes?

[BDKJMU]

Yes?

Anytime a cheerleading, dance, pom pom, etc team is mentioned, should be a pic or link.

[JohnStOnge]

Those two games were boring blowouts. Texas Tech doesn't play defense and LSU is overrated. The only good game yesterday was one nobody saw, Wisconsin vs USC.

The Camellia Bowl was a much better game...App kicking a last second field goal to win.

Either LSU or Texas Tech would kick the crap out of either of the teams in the Camellia Bowl. When you're watching the Camellia Bowl you're watching two crappy teams from two crappy conferences in the context of FBS.

When you're watching LSU play Texas Tech you're watching a game that at LEAST has something to do with bragging rights among the conferences that are actually relevant in FBS. It's the SEC and the Big 12. It's not the friggin' MAC and Sun Belt.

[AshevilleApp]

Those two games were boring blowouts. Texas Tech doesn't play defense and LSU is overrated. The only good game yesterday was one nobody saw, Wisconsin vs USC.

The Camellia Bowl was a much better game...App kicking a last second field goal to win.

Either LSU or Texas Tech would kick the crap out of either of the teams in the Camellia Bowl. When you're watching the Camellia Bowl you're watching two crappy teams from two crappy conferences in the context of FBS.

When you're watching LSU play Texas Tech you're watching a game that at LEAST has something to do with bragging rights among the conferences that are actually relevant in FBS. It's the SEC and the Big 12. It's not the friggin' MAC and Sun Belt.

You missed a good game then John. Your loss. Looking forward to McNeese having another great regular season in the Southland next year. Then getting bounced in their first playoff game. Again. Relevant indeed.

[JohnStOnge]

You missed a good game then John.

It was a game between one team that's now rated 59th in FBS and another team that's rated 88th in Sagarin. You could quibble with Sagarin but no matter what rating system you choose it's going to be something like that. It was a close game. That doesn't make it interesting. I realize some people who aren't fans of the two schools involved watched it. But that's a mystery to me. If you're not a fan of one of the two schools why on EARTH would you want to take the time to watch something like that? You know Savannah State could play Houston Baptist and it could be a close game because they're evenly matched. But why would you want to watch that?

And that's the thing that's going on with bowls now. There are so many bowls that they have to have crappy teams...and I mean crappy relative to the level they're in...playing each other in order to be able to fill all the slots. And look...be objective...Appalachian State and Ohio were not "good" teams in the context of FBS this year.

[AshevilleApp]

You missed a good game then John.

It was a game between one team that's now rated 59th in FBS and another team that's rated 88th in Sagarin. You could quibble with Sagarin but no matter what rating system you choose it's going to be something like that. It was a close game. That doesn't make it interesting. I realize some people who aren't fans of the two schools involved watched it. But that's a mystery to me. If you're not a fan of one of the two schools why on EARTH would you want to take the time to watch something like that? You know Savannah State could play Houston Baptist and it could be a close game because they're evenly matched. But why would you want to watch that?

And that's the thing that's going on with bowls now. There are so many bowls that they have to have crappy teams...and I mean crappy relative to the level they're in...playing each other in order to be able to fill all the slots.

Are you going to watch NDSU vs JSU? Who really cares about them, outside of their fan bases?

http://www.appstatesports.com/mediaPort ... ID=4846498" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JohnStOnge]

Are you going to watch NDSU vs JSU? Who really cares about them, outside of their fan bases?

Sure I will because in the context of the level they're playing at they're very good teams. I'm interested in that. Just like I was interested in Wisconsin Whitewater vs. Mount Union in the D-III semis and St. Thomas in the D-III championship. Or watching West Georgia at Southwest Missouri and Grand Valley State at Shepherd in the D-II semis. Or various high school playoff games I watched. Those games mean something in the context of the level of competition. They're interesting. Just like I would watch Appalachian State when they were in FCS playing for a chance at a national title.

But watching the 58th rated FBS team play the 88th rated FBS team play in one of friggin' 40 bowl games? WHY would I find that interesting? I mean really. Take yourself out of being a fan of one of the teams involved and think about it.

[AshevilleApp]

Are you going to watch NDSU vs JSU? Who really cares about them, outside of their fan bases?

Sure I will because in the context of the level they're playing at they're very good teams. I'm interested in that. Just like I was interested in Wisconsin Whitewater vs. Mount Union in the D-III semis and St. Thomas in the D-III championship. Or watching West Georgia at Southwest Missouri and Grand Valley State at Shepherd in the D-II semis. Or various high school playoff games I watched. Those games mean something in the context of the level of competition. They're interesting. Just like I would watch Appalachian State when they were in FCS playing for a chance at a national title.

But watching the 58th rated FBS team play the 88th rated FBS team play in one of friggin' 40 bowl games? WHY would I find that interesting? I mean really. Take yourself out of being a fan of one of the teams involved and think about it.

So context only is meaningful towards championships? If you move to FBS, the first relevancy test is reaching a Bowl and winning it. As your post points out, it is all about competing at the level you play.

As far as being interested? I've always watched the Bowls. Some of the "lower grade" Bowls, have had the highest entertainment value.

[Baldy]

Sure I will because in the context of the level they're playing at they're very good teams. I'm interested in that. Just like I was interested in Wisconsin Whitewater vs. Mount Union in the D-III semis and St. Thomas in the D-III championship. Or watching West Georgia at Southwest Missouri and Grand Valley State at Shepherd in the D-II semis. Or various high school playoff games I watched. Those games mean something in the context of the level of competition. They're interesting. Just like I would watch Appalachian State when they were in FCS playing for a chance at a national title.

But watching the 58th rated FBS team play the 88th rated FBS team play in one of friggin' 40 bowl games? WHY would I find that interesting? I mean really. Take yourself out of being a fan of one of the teams involved and think about it.

So context only is meaningful towards championships? If you move to FBS, the first relevancy test is reaching a Bowl and winning it. As your post points out, it is all about competing at the level you play.

As far as being interested? I've always watched the Bowls. Some of the "lower grade" Bowls, have had the highest entertainment value.

Johnny doesn't understand context. He has trouble deciphering context between the G5 and P5. In his narrow frame of reference, he thinks the G5 and FCS are basically the same thing. In a few isolated instances, the two are very similar. What he fails to grasp is that even though his Cowboys were a very good FCS playoff team, they would get their teeth kicked in by App, Ohio, GS, or BGSU. On a similar note, he doesn't understand that even though the Slum Belch is the "worst" (CUSA is actually the worst) FBS conference, the Belch went 9-1 versus FCS teams. Bottom feeder Idaho did struggle to beat a mid level FCS Wofford, and perennial bottom feeder GAy State lost to an almost playoff team in Liberty. We also saw to very good FCS conference champions, two teams who made it into the later rounds of the playoffs get absolutely destroyed by Slum Belch teams. I didn't see what Troy did to CSU, but I did witness The Citadel be competitive for about 5 plays against GS.

[Baldy]

Those two games were boring blowouts. Texas Tech doesn't play defense and LSU is overrated. The only good game yesterday was one nobody saw, Wisconsin vs USC.

The Camellia Bowl was a much better game...App kicking a last second field goal to win.

Either LSU or Texas Tech would kick the crap out of either of the teams in the Camellia Bowl. When you're watching the Camellia Bowl you're watching two crappy teams from two crappy conferences in the context of FBS.

When you're watching LSU play Texas Tech you're watching a game that at LEAST has something to do with bragging rights among the conferences that are actually relevant in FBS. It's the SEC and the Big 12. It's not the friggin' MAC and Sun Belt.

LSU probably, because they are a big physical SEC team on defense, but after Fournette, they don't have much offensively. Texas Tech on the other hand, they would score some points, but their offense would have trouble getting on the field because Georgia Southern would run for days and grind that pitiful defense of theirs into a can of potted meat.

[JohnStOnge]

[quote]LSU probably, because they are a big physical SEC team on defense, but after Fournette, they don't have much offensively. Texas Tech on the other hand, they would score some points, but their offense would have trouble getting on the field because Georgia Southern would run for days and grind that pitiful defense of theirs into a can of potted meat[quote]

I will grant you that it's possible Texas Tech could have problems due to inability to stop the run. Sam Houston State ran for 317 yards at 6.9 yards per carry on them.

LSU has a lot of talent on offense other than Fournette. Like their #2 back, Darius Guice, averaged 8.5 yards per carry. They've got very good receivers. They've got one guy that set a national record for receptions in high school and another guy who is tall, can jump, has great hands, and was the #1 rated receiver coming out of high school. They just don't have a quarterback.

But they wouldn't need one against any of the teams like App State, Ohio, Georgia Southern, and Bowling Green. Their problem is when they run into teams that have the players on defense to stop their running game because they can't throw the football. None of those teams would have a prayer of stopping their running game. Meanwhile they've still got a bunch of future NFL players on defense.

[JohnStOnge]

If you move to FBS, the first relevancy test is reaching a Bowl and winning it.

I just disagree with that. In fact that's the problem I was getting at in starting this thread. So, for example, San Jose State reached a Bowl and won it. But as of now San Jose State is rated 90th among 127 FBS teams in Sagarin Ratings and the team they beat, Georgia State, is rated 100th. You could quibble with Sagarin ratings if you want but any system you choose is going to present a similar picture. It was, relative to FBS overall, two bad teams playing in a bowl game. One bad team beat an ever worse team.

The idea that making a bowl means a team really accomplished something became obsolete quite some time ago. When you've got more than 60 percent of teams in the subdivision going to bowls what does it really say? I guess you could say that NOT going to a bowl means you're REALLY bad. But going to a bowl obviously does not necessarily mean you're good or relevant.

[JohnStOnge]

What he fails to grasp is that even though his Cowboys were a very good FCS playoff team, they would get their teeth kicked in by App, Ohio, GS, or BGSU. On a similar note, he doesn't understand that even though the Slum Belch is the "worst" (CUSA is actually the worst) FBS conference, the Belch went 9-1 versus FCS teams.

I looked at the Sun Belt performance against FCS opponents and I think it's consistent with what I wrote:

The Sun Belt is equivalent to one of the stronger FCS conferences in caliber. They did not play a set of FCS teams that was strong overall. If you go with current Sagarin ratings here are the ratings among FCS schools of the FCS teams the Sun Belt played:

17
21
41
42
67
72
94
98
99
115

The average rating is 66.6, so as a sample of FCS it's slightly below the average rating for the subdivision (62). As for the McNeese thing: We will never know, but I think you're both over estimating the FBS teams you listed and under estimating the talent level McNeese had this year. As I wrote earlier, though the sample size is small, McNeese as an FCS has a 4-1 record against teams from the Sun Belt and MAC. The most recent one, a win over then Sun Belt contender Middle Tennessee State, wasn't that long ago (2012). They were an athletic team that would not have been over matched in that area. They would've had a team speed advantage over either of the two MAC teams and would've been on an even footing with Georgia Southern in that area. I didn't see App State play this year but I'm assuming the speed thing would be essentially even there too.

As an aside: According to Sagarin McNeese was better than any of the FCS teams Sun Belt teams played this year. They're rated 13th.

Anyway, as I've said before, if it's McNeese playing in the regular season and they're playing a Sun Belt or MAC team I look at that as a winnable game. They might be the underdog depending on who they're playing. But it's a winnable game if they play well and minimize mistakes.

[Skjellyfetti]

yeah. football sucks. less of that, plz.

[AshevilleApp]

If you move to FBS, the first relevancy test is reaching a Bowl and winning it.

I just disagree with that. In fact that's the problem I was getting at in starting this thread. So, for example, San Jose State reached a Bowl and won it. But as of now San Jose State is rated 90th among 127 FBS teams in Sagarin Ratings and the team they beat, Georgia State, is rated 100th. You could quibble with Sagarin ratings if you want but any system you choose is going to present a similar picture. It was, relative to FBS overall, two bad teams playing in a bowl game. One bad team beat an ever worse team.

The idea that making a bowl means a team really accomplished something became obsolete quite some time ago. When you've got more than 60 percent of teams in the subdivision going to bowls what does it really say? I guess you could say that NOT going to a bowl means you're REALLY bad. But going to a bowl obviously does not necessarily mean you're good or relevant.

How about going 11-2, and 3-0 against other G5 conference teams?

[JohnStOnge]

How about going 11-2, and 3-0 against other G5 conference teams?

I'll say the same thing I said about Louisiana Lafayette over the previous four years when they had good seasons by their standards and won bowl games: Appalachian State's success was an artifact of playing an extremely weak schedule by FBS standards and they probably could not have fashioned a winning record against a schedule of average FBS strength. The highest rated team they beat by Sagarin ratings is conference mate Georgia Southern at 61st. The three non conference FBS opponents they beat are rated 88th, 115th, and 120th in FBS.

[AshevilleApp]

How about going 11-2, and 3-0 against other G5 conference teams?

I'll say the same thing I said about Louisiana Lafayette over the previous four years when they had good seasons by their standards and won bowl games: Appalachian State's success was an artifact of playing an extremely weak schedule by FBS standards and they probably could not have fashioned a winning record against a schedule of average FBS strength. The highest rated team they beat by Sagarin ratings is conference mate Georgia Southern at 61st. The three non conference FBS opponents they beat are rated 88th, 115th, and 120th in FBS.

[Baldy]

LSU probably, because they are a big physical SEC team on defense, but after Fournette, they don't have much offensively. Texas Tech on the other hand, they would score some points, but their offense would have trouble getting on the field because Georgia Southern would run for days and grind that pitiful defense of theirs into a can of potted meat

Sounds a lot like UGA. A great running game, great defense, and no QB. Thanks to a muffed punt, and a missed 31 yd FG, they were able to defeat Georgia Southern in OT.