That was pretty much Schiano's MO as well.
RU Bowl Talk
- Thread starter satnom
- Start date
Every single staff member gets a bonus for going to a bowl, so we are $175,000 in the hole as soon as the bid is accepted
Here's my problem with it.
You want to invite a 5-7 team? Fine, then do it by strength of schedule and not APR. ThAt is participation trophy s#it. And don't count a win vs an FCS opponent.
You want to invite a 5-7 team? Fine, then do it by strength of schedule and not APR. ThAt is participation trophy s#it. And don't count a win vs an FCS opponent.
I wonder if the players would actually like to go bowling at 5-7. It's an embarrassment. It really isn't an accomplishment. Just a participation trophy. If I was a player I wouldn't want to be reminded of such a poor season. Would rather Just get ready for next year.
It's a shame bowls have let themselves get to this point. 6-6 and bowling sucks. 5-7 is flat out embarrassing.
It's a shame bowls have let themselves get to this point. 6-6 and bowling sucks. 5-7 is flat out embarrassing.
Do these bonuses get nullified if the corresponding coaching staff members are dismissed immediately after the season before accepting any bowl bids? On top of the fact that it's a pathetic participation trophy, a 5-7 bowl bid could potentially cost RU real money, which is desperately needed to contribute toward a new coaching staff..
If we accept the bowl, they'll get paid regardless of whether or not the ax comes down prior. Our financial situation doesn't factor into the equation at all. I feel safe in assuming our legal team didn't write a 5-7 bowl clause into the contracts but I haven't actually looked at them.
Not crazy about 6-6 teams making a bowl, and certainly not on board with a 5-7 team making it. Really pathetic that we would get into a bowl at 5-7 and actually have people feel good about it. Up to right now we don't deserve a bow, nor should we be in one.
I'd like to watch RU in a bowl. Equally matched teams would make it competitive but I think we would win because our tough schedule. I think the players, particularly seniors, would like to bowl with the travel and gifts. Extra practices are good. Coaches (hopefully new) can tell recruits we won a bowl last year. I see a lot of positives.
This season has proven that 2 weeks of practice are over rated. I think our QB has perfected the 2 yard pass already. Enough. Play a game final game at home and pull the plug.
Fans deserve a fully paid all inclusive trip to warm destination of choice. But that is no reason to take a bowl win 5 freakin wins... pathetic . No wonder we have the athletics program we have.
Fans deserve a fully paid all inclusive trip to warm destination of choice. But that is no reason to take a bowl win 5 freakin wins... pathetic . No wonder we have the athletics program we have.
In the NBA, under-500 teams qualify for the playoffs every year. In the NFL, we sometimes see division winners at 7-9. It happens in every sport. Should all these teams also disavow the chance to keep playing out of principle, or solely Rutgers?
You play until they tell you that you can't play anymore. Simple as that.
You play until they tell you that you can't play anymore. Simple as that.
Shouldn't each coach IMPROVE the program from the previous one? Rather than send it backwards.
Hate Schiano all you want, but Flood began coaching at a level that took Schiano many years to reach. If Flood was even a decent coach, he'd be beating teams with a pulse.
Even though there is $ involved this isn't the NFL or NBA. And they don't give you the option.
At some point you need to have some pride and make a statement. Going along to get along isn't the answer or even remotely close to big time.
Why? Numerous coaches have said it is a huge benefit. They have said this for an obvious reason- because it is. Practicing helps you do something better as opposed to not practicing.
OK let me pose this question. Should all 5-7 teams turn down bowl bids, or just us?
Yes. It shouldn't even be allowed IMHO. It's a disgrace. I'm going to post the FACTS about our POTENTIAL 5-7 record, yet again, so people realize how pathetic it is for us to get an invite. We will have beaten:
4-7 FCS Norfolk State
0-11 (on their way to 0-12) Kansas
2-9 (on their way to 2-10) Army
5-6 (will finish 5-7 or 6-6) Indiana
2-10 Maryland
...that's 4 wins, over FBS programs, with a whopping total of (likely) TEN WINS COMBINED!!! No team - EVER - should have "earned" a bowl bid, and the privilege of 2 extra weeks of practice, with those "accomplishments." I said it before and I'll say it again: if a single 5-7 team gets rewarded, with 2 extra weeks of practice, then REWARD EVERY team in the nation with the same. 84 teams get'em, this year, might as well be 127!
They should also cancel next season because the team will probably not be as good as most would like. Because it's all so DISGRACEFUL to be invited to a bowl game after going 5-7. Disgraceful! College kids playing in a non-prestigious football game. Oh what a disgrace!!
I agree..it shouldn't be allowed. But it is.
That being the case, all 5-7 teams should turn down the bid?
We shouldn't turn down the bid if we get one. But I agree, it's dumb we (and other 5-7 teams) are eligible
The fact is a 5-7 team (possibly a few) are likely to go bowling...which is extremely dumb.
But if RU is one of them that gets invited, there's no reason to turn it down. I hope for an invite.
But if RU is one of them that gets invited, there's no reason to turn it down. I hope for an invite.
I'm an "idiot"? Really? Would you like to explain yourself or you just like throwing things against walls to see if they'll stick? A "participation trophy" is EXACTLY what a bowl game, for a 5-7 (4-7 vs FBS competition) program is, nothing more, nothing less.
Now, please, elaborate as to how I'm wrong, or an "idiot," so we can all see just how damn brilliant you are, sir. Thank you.
No question, we can't nor won't "turn it down," doesn't make it any better IMHO.
Not agreeing u r an idiot (we can have different opinions without being idiots, ha) but question for u.
I get what u r saying about "participation trophies" but isn't every bowl besides the playoffs a participation award?
No, they are supposed to be a reward for a good season, but as their #'s increased it became one for a .500 season or better AS dictated by the NCAA, however, due to the absurd # of games we now are looking at multiple sub-500 teams in games that wouldn't otherwise be able to fill slots. Hence, merely being "rewarded" for having a pulse this season i.e."participating," and my opinion that you may as well give the other 43 teams the extra 2 weeks of practice because they, too, "participated."
Again, we won't nor should we turn one down, but it's laughable to think we have "earned" the right to play in the post-season.
Not really, but I also dont think of my kid as a pathetic disgrace for receiving one.
Well, I surely hope not, but that's not going to change how so feel about a college football program with 4 FBS wins accepting a post-season birth. Thanks, however, for making me feel just a little guilty about that one.
History supports AYN's point. The first bowl game was held in Pasadena, CA in 1902 to pit the best East and West teams against each other. For years bowls were relatively few in number, prestigious, and sent coveted invites to winning teams. If I remember correctly, Rutgers turned down a bowl invite after its undefeated season because the university felt the team deserved a better berth than the one offered.
It's sad to me that by potentially going 5-7, Rutgers may be offered a bowl berth that I'd rather the school turn down because it wouldn't be deserving of it.
None of us are belittling the team itself (or your kid) for receiving a participation trophy. We are just against the concept of one because it does not reward a winning effort.
This NFL player had the right idea about kids' participation trophies..
http://www.weaselzippers.us/231795-nfl-player-james-harrison-returns-sons-participation-trophies/
BTW - this is an about us, I've been talking about this for a couple years now, and most of you know it. I just think it's flat out stupid.
You're an idiot for frothing at the mouth over whether a 5-7 team is worthy of playing in a meaningless exhibition game against some other crappy team. You're an idiot for acting like it's a travesty that a 5-7 team might play in a bowl game normally reserved for a 6-6 team.
Finally, you're an idiot for invoking participation trophies, that favorite boogeyman of resentful losers who like to complain about the "pussification of America" while shaking their fists at the TV.
A participation trophy is ghey. Playing another meaningless football game in a slew of them isn't a participation trophy.
That would be my argument as well. Given the ~125 teams that are eligible for the current 4 team playoff (which should definitely be upped to at least 8), one could reasonably argue there is merit to having bowl games between the teams that had great seasons but didn't quite make the final 4. But the winners of those games have no chance to be the national champs, so they are really nothing more than 'participation trophy' games. It has gotten worse over time such that now you have plenty of 7-5, 6-6 and potentially even 5-7 teams qualifying for a bowl game. I agree with Nuts and others that all teams should be allowed the extra practice at this point. In reality, the teams that didn't make a bowl need the extra practice more than the teams that did.