ALOT of 5-7 teams could be going to bowls

[GGCAT]

This obviously speaks to wayyy too many bowls (40) and conferences having wayyy to many tie in (CUSA has 7....seriously?) and nowhere near enough teams to fill them. So youre looking at a fair number of losing record teams being "rewarded" with bowls.

But if we wind up being one of these 5-7 teams, would we actively pursue one of these slots. In the link below one source states that teams with higher APR's would be given preference, while another basically says its who comes to the table with the most $$$$

For us, the one obvious benefit would be practices, but to me it would also be spun as progress and an excuse as to not make the changes I believe that most of us think need to happen before next season.

What say you?


http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/every-bowl-eligible-team-conference-week-11/

 

[kyhusker2]

Absolutely you try to get in a bowl. It would be foolish not to. Doesn't change the fact that the team is 5-7.

 

[CatsFanGG24]

If we end at 5-7 and have a shot at one, you take it...the practice for our new QB as the main man will be valuable...

Bowl invite at 5-7 wouldn't change the fact that we were a disappointing 5-7, but would be good for the players.

 

[UK Cats Rock]

I hope we don't have to worry about it, but if we do, I hope we get it for Melvin Lewis.

 

[Tskware]

I cannot imagine a scenario where anyone would want to spend the time and money to go to a bowl to see a 5-7 team play. It would depend on who the opponent was to make me even want to watch it.

 

[UKWildcats#8]

Well accept the bid, but embarrassing scenario if it happens. We will be even more of a laughingstock in the SEC than we are at present.

 

[CatsFanGG24]

Who cares about whether the fans would go or whether we would be laughed at...currently, other decent teams have an extra 60 practices on us over the past 4 years....we need the practice, we need the reps, we need all the help we can get.

 

[kyhusker2]

I cannot imagine a scenario where anyone would want to spend the time and money to go to a bowl to see a 5-7 team play. It would depend on who the opponent was to make me even want to watch it.

Would it be much different than going to see a 6-6 team play? Or 7-5?

Outside of the top bowls, it's all pretty meaningless. But it give the team practice time and a nice little reward for their hard work. Even if the team is 5-7, those players work their asses off during the season.

 

[devils58]

If we go to a bowl at 5-7, I'll go. Heck, why not? Visit a city I've probably never been to and the team gets another month of sorely needed practice. Hopefully Drew Barker finishes the season well, and that extra month benefits him the most.

 

[TBCat]

No question you accept the bowl. The extra practice alone dictates that you do so.

 

[WildCard]

Going to a bowl gets you 15 extra practice days. (With 80 teams now going to bowls, non bowl teams should have an option for 15 "extra" practice days as well but that is another discussion).

Conferences usually "pool" the collective bowl revenues and have a sliding expense scale for the participating teams which varies with the individual bowl payouts. So actual bowl revenue to the school is a share of total conference revenue, not the individual bowl pay out (except of course for independents).

A P5 school going to one of these lesser bowls will almost certainly "lose" money as "extravagances" in bowl expense (e.g., numbers in official party, on site expenses, possibly not meeting ticket guarantee, etc.) usually outstrip the conference allowed expense budget. So that means a net loss to the school. But there is still that extra practice thing. It is not totally wrong to characterize participation in such bowls as "buying additional practice time". Furthermore if you are a 5-7 team there is good possibility you finish the season as a 5-8 team and that really sucks. And even if you win, you won't finish with a .500 record.

So do you go to a bowl as a 5-7 team?

Yes, you do. As kyhusker notes it is a little "thank you" for guys who have worked their butts off for the past 4 months. And did I mention extra practice? All JMO.

Peace

 

[NamelessOne]

I think if there is not enough FBS teams over 500, you should let a few FCS teams in. they would make money from that than their playoff.

Heck, theres probably 5 or 6 really good FCS teams that would deserve the nod over UK. Problem is it wouldnt bring money in. NCAA needs to cut some bowls or add some teams.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

This obviously speaks to wayyy too many bowls (40) and conferences having wayyy to many tie in (CUSA has 7....seriously?) and nowhere near enough teams to fill them. So youre looking at a fair number of losing record teams being "rewarded" with bowls.

But if we wind up being one of these 5-7 teams, would we actively pursue one of these slots. In the link below one source states that teams with higher APR's would be given preference, while another basically says its who comes to the table with the most $$$$

For us, the one obvious benefit would be practices, but to me it would also be spun as progress and an excuse as to not make the changes I believe that most of us think need to happen before next season.

What say you?


http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/every-bowl-eligible-team-conference-week-11/

Quite a few teams are close, like UK, needing to win 1 or 2 more games. Some like AU have a cupcake left so they will make it, VT has Virginia left so they likely make it, but many of the others will have to pull 1 or 2 pretty big upsets to get to 6 games. UK being in the SEC, or any of the P5 schools who come up a game short, would have a decent shot at getting a bowl I would think, most likely a very winnable bowl game too against a non P5 team.

 

[UKUGA]

I cannot imagine a scenario where anyone would want to spend the time and money to go to a bowl to see a 5-7 team play. It would depend on who the opponent was to make me even want to watch it.

As opposed to spending time and money to see a 6-6 team play a bowl game?

 

[devils58]

The bottom is line $$$. Any bowl needing to fill a spot with a 5-7 team, will look at UK first. They know UK will travel better than most any other team they can bring in. Yes, I know UK has 2 games left, but lets not kid ourselves, we ain't beating UL unless Barker takes the offense to a level we didn't know about.

 

[CladinBigOrange]

History indicates that it won't be an issue.

 

[Tskware]

As opposed to spending time and money to see a 6-6 team play a bowl game?

Almost certainly would not do that either, I did not go to the Liberty Bowl or the Compass Bowl, just not that interested

 

[truebluewildcat_rivals34254]

Nobody wants to watch a slap fight, to go .500, at the Pooper Bowl...

NCAA needs to watch the over saturation...there are about 12-15 bowls that people care about...all the others barely sell out the lower section of the stadiums...

I'd agree that they need to figure out how to get the good FCS programs involved in the smaller bowls somehow...maybe turn the lower bowls into their playoffs...it would be more intriguing if the teams were competing for something and the bowls had some significance...

 

[kyhusker2]

What's either funny or sad about this thread is that prior to the first game, one bowl projection had Nebraska playing UK in the Music City Bowl. Several posters said that would mean a disappointing season for UK, and I said it would be a disaster for Nebraska.

Nothing like preseason optimism!

 

[OHIO COLONEL]

If we go to a bowl at 5-7, I'll go. Heck, why not? Visit a city I've probably never been to and the team gets another month of sorely needed practice. Hopefully Drew Barker finishes the season well, and that extra month benefits him the most.

At 5-7 you would almost be assured of visiting a city that you've never been to...and probably would never go back :smiley:

 

[jnewc2_rivals30628]

IMO the importance of "extra" practices is more than a little overstated. How did those extra practices help South Carolina and Mizzou last year? How much did they help Joker after his first season? Good teams aren't good because of the extra practices they get prepping for a bowl, they're good because they have coaches that are good at recruiting and prepping their players in the offseason and prepping for games during the season. How much do you really think that December practices are going to effect a completely different team that takes the field the following September? The effect of bowl practices is entirely overstated. There are a ton of instances where bowl teams from the previous year are noticeably worse the next year. Good teams aren't good because they have bowl practices, they're good because they have superior players and coaches.

 

[WildCard]

IMO the importance of "extra" practices is more than a little overstated. How did those extra practices help South Carolina and Mizzou last year? How much did they help Joker after his first season? Good teams aren't good because of the extra practices they get prepping for a bowl, they're good because they have coaches that are good at recruiting and prepping their players in the offseason and prepping for games during the season. How much do you really think that December practices are going to effect a completely different team that takes the field the following September? The effect of bowl practices is entirely overstated. There are a ton of instances where bowl teams from the previous year are noticeably worse the next year. Good teams aren't good because they have bowl practices, they're good because they have superior players and coaches.

Extra practice can't hurt but it doesn't always help. It certainly does not help if the team carries a crappy attitude into post season works and a 5-7 team is a lot more likely to do that than a 6-6 team. Most coaches say the extra practice is really about giving the FR more attention rather than "reinventing yourself" just for the bowl.

Peace

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

Extra practice can't hurt but it doesn't always help. It certainly does not help if the team carries a crappy attitude into post season works and a 5-7 team is a lot more likely to do that than a 6-6 team. Most coaches say the extra practice is really about giving the FR more attention rather than "reinventing yourself" just for the bowl.

Peace

I can't speak for every team, but Richt and UGA usually blow off 3-5 days of practice, finals and hollidays are in there, then 2-3 of them are in the host city and are useless walk thrus for the most part. So we don't get much out of bowl practices, but its getting to see one more game thats important.

 

[KyDore]

I think that most teams would jump at the chance for the extra practices and bowl experience for players and fans.

That being said, with UK's performance down the stretch combined with its last-place-in-the-SEC Academic Progress Rate ("APR"), which is supposed to be the major criterion for selection as a five-win team, seems to make such a possibility, at a minimum, remote.

 

[buster3.0]

I wonder if this happens will UK get special bowl t-shirts made.

 

[uofkFTW18]

Would be the ultimate slap in the face if we didn't get one of these glorified participation awards. [laughing]

 

[KyCatFan_rivals45723]

Just think how bad we look at 5-8 if we were to lose. This team seems dysfunctional and I don't think the extra practice will change that.

 

[CondorCat]

The SEC has 10 bowl tie-ins. Currently 9 SEC teams are bowl eligible.

Assuming one SEC team makes the college football playoffs (Alabama), that leaves 2 bowl spots needing to be filled. South Carolina (3-7) can't become eligible so there are 4 SEC teams left:

Auburn (5-5) Idaho, Alabama
Missouri (5-5) Tennessee, @Arkansas
Kentucky (4-6) Charlotte, Louisville
Vanderbilt (4-6) Texas A&M, @Tennessee

I think Auburn and UK have the best chances to become bowl eligible.

 

[WildcatofNati]

The SEC has 10 bowl tie-ins. Currently 9 SEC teams are bowl eligible.

Assuming one SEC team makes the college football playoffs (Alabama), that leaves 2 bowl spots needing to be filled. South Carolina (3-7) can't become eligible so there are 4 SEC teams left:

Auburn (5-5) Idaho, Alabama
Missouri (5-5) Tennessee, @Arkansas
Kentucky (4-6) Charlotte, Louisville
Vanderbilt (4-6) Texas A&M, @Tennessee

I think Auburn and UK have the best chances to become bowl eligible.

The Peach Bowl (chick fillet bowl) will probably also want SEC in it.

As it is, Auburn is a lock to go bowling; no way they lose to an atrocious Idaho team. Missouri and UK both are about 40/60, and Vandy is toast. Of course, if a 5 win team can get it, Vandy is maybe not toast and maybe Mizzou and UK are better than 40 percent.

 

[Goingfor9]

Doesn't a team have to finish .500 or better to participate in a bowl?

 

[Jon(-24)]

Doesn't a team have to finish .500 or better to participate in a bowl?

No. The bowls keep expanding and the FBS schools keep stayin mostly the same. There are 41 bowls and a need for 80 bowl eligible teams. Right now there are 62 bowl eligible teams and 32 teams with at least 4 wins and therefore a shot at 6-6. There's a really good chance there won't be 80 teams that are 6-6 or better.

 

[NavyCat88]

The "benefit" of extra practice only exists if the coaches know what they're doing in planning/running the practices. We've been practicing all year and look like a toddler soccer out there on gameday. Unless our staff develops some planning and focus, I'm not sure we get much of a benefit.

 

[BoulderCat_rivals187983]

We have to take it if it's offered. It'd be foolish not to, but yea who's going to care about watching UK or any other 5-7 team in a bowl. There are too many bowls. I may be off on my numbers but with 40 bowls you obviously need 80 teams. There are only about 125 total in FCS. Personally I don't think any team should play in a bowl that doesn't have at least a .500 record in their conference, and a 7-5/6 record overall. The teams which go to Hawaii for a game get to play a 13th game as CU is this year. If they go 6-7 they'll get into a bowl. Problem is of course the cities which host these bowls see them as money maker's for their area so they would object if the NCAA came out with rules like I suggested, and therefore kill a number of bowl games. So why not just add 23 more and let every team play in a bowl every year. It kind of seems like the direction we're heading. Sort of like giving out participation awards.

 

[BlueRaider22]

On a broader note, I personally don't mind a large number of bowls. If I want to watch, I will. If I don't, I won't. For me, the CaitlynJenner.com Bowl does not take away from the Rose Bowl.

What I don't care for are teams that get to go to a bowl game with losing records over ones that don't. If UK gets a bowl bid going 5-7......you take it. Use the extra practices, exposure, etc, to your advantage. That doesn't mean that I think we deserve to go.

To, me those teams that go 7-5, 8-4 in the Sunbelt deserve the bid over a 5-7 SEC team........even though the SEC team may still be a better team and they may be able to fill the stadium a little more. The thought of a school getting rejected for a bowl with a 8-4 record when we have 600 bowl games while teams with losing records get to go........just bothers me.

 

[Kai Slater]

41 bowl games? You've got to be kidding me. When does it stop? Why not just let everyone have one post season game and call it a "bowl" game?

 

[NavyCat88]

I don't mind the number of bowls......with the exception of the FBS playoff games, they're all exhibition games really.
I watch a bunch of them throughout the holidays overdosing on CFB for the spring/summer drought where I have to suffer through hockey and mlb.
However, I would much rather see a good FCS 7-win team (there are a half dozen or so 7-win FCS teams that just miss their 24-team playoff) play against a 6-or-7 win FBS team; rather, than rewarding bad sub-.500 FBS teams for "just being available." There are host of good FCS teams out there that would bring a lot of fire and some crazy fans to the small bowl scene. They would also keep the mid-grade FBS teams on their toes because nobody wants to finish the season losing to a lower division team.

 

[chuckster.sixpack]

Who cares about whether the fans would go or whether we would be laughed at...currently, other decent teams have an extra 60 practices on us over the past 4 years....we need the practice, we need the reps, we need all the help we can get.

That practice line is overrated and overstated. I've never heard anyone in the NFL whine about losing practice time because a team didn't make the playoffs. Have you ever heard a basketball coach mention practice as a benefit for making the NCAAT. Or have you ever head Bill Self say "there goes our extra practice time" after another disappointing early exit? It's usually coach speak from football guys whose team has no business being in postseason play.

 

[CatsFanGG24]

That practice line is overrated and overstated. I've never heard anyone in the NFL whine about losing practice time because a team didn't make the playoffs. Have you ever heard a basketball coach mention practice as a benefit for making the NCAAT. Or have you ever head Bill Self say "there goes our extra practice time" after another disappointing early exit? It's usually coach speak from football guys whose team has no business being in postseason play.

Yep - next year we should just skip spring practice...not helpful at all.

[eyeroll]

 

[CatsFanGG24]

And to follow up that - we have had quite a few guys who have had the light come on for them in the bowl practices...Stevie Johnson being one - and he was excellent the following year...starting with game 1.

 

[UKWildcats#8]

Has anyone ever went 5-8? We could set a record.