CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

The Pac 12 does not have enough teams bowl eligible to fulfill their bowl obligations!

I shall not elucidate on the incursion of 5-7 teams into the bowl system, but I think there will plenteous seats available at many sites.

They aren't the only ones.

There's currently 74 eligible teams with 80 spots. And there's only two more teams that can win one more game to get to 6-6 (ULL and South Alabama). So that means, if they each win, we'll need to take two teams with losing records plus 6-6 Army and 6-7 Hawaii (Army has two wins over FCS teams, so only one counts). I think under these circumstances Army would get taken. I think the tiebreaker is by record (so 5-7) and then by APR. Texas might get selected, but who knows if they want to even participate under their circumstances. North Texas and Mississippi State should get in, from what I can gather. Cal is another possibility if they get a team to decline a bid.

Eric wrote:Texas might get selected, but who knows if they want to even participate under their circumstances.

It would depend on whether Herman would coach the Bowl Game, or be with the team. If he wanted to get familiar with the players, and run those practices, it could really set the tone for his approach to the program.

Has anybody heard if Herman is planning on coaching Houston in their Bowl ..? Or if he is headed to Texas now, so as to get a jump on recruiting?

.
.
.

This is an example of how football has degenerated into a bevy of moral pygmies. Contracts, loyalty mean nothing. If the NCAA had on iota of ethical fiber they would not allow coaching contracts be changed until a school's season was complete. The above example is quintessential "heck with kids."

I disagree ... if a coach is coming in, and he has an opportunity to meet the players he is going to be coaching. This would give the kids the chance to get to know him, immediately.

Sure, if we take an approach where we just think of the players whom are being transitioned out from a current coach, we might say,"Well, they aren't thinking of these guys, shame on them".

But, if in real life situations, where an employer loses a quality manager to another company; then, instead of hiring up from within, you outsource the best candidate for the position. Would you then prefer to have the outgoing manager stick around, to patty-cake & undermine the new position head's potential ..? Or would you rather shake hands, wishing the best to your seasoned manager, seeing him off, then letting the new department head take over from day one?

Remember, that part of saying College is an Academic Institution first, then these students should be players, second; also infers that these young men will be mature enough to handle such things as coaching changes ... it really is a part of life. And, Knowing that not every one of these players will become professionals in football, you should actually be supportive of the real life environment they are being exposed to.

Loyalties aside ... these things happen in other forms of business. Saying the NCAA should step in and enforce ethics is to ignore, for the coaches, this is their job, all a part of their business.

And I think it is selfish to undermine the players who will be under the tutelage of a new head coach going forward, because you don't want to hurt anyone's feelings ... Really..?

In the case of Orgeron, the players have responded incredibly well after their head coach's firing. At both LSU & USC. Yes, Orgeron was hired from within with LSU as the now full time head coach. But, his interim ended when Herman was found to be going to Texas. And He wasn't hired on at USC after Kiffin's release.

However, the turn around at both programs was immediate following the head coach departing. Which, in both cases, happened during the season. Not post.

.
.
.

I do not see it at all as you do. This is not a case of hurting people's feelings or having someone stick around, etc. It is a situation of making the main point of college athletics as a part of the college experience and help develop young men and women in all aspects of life. I don't care if it the debate team, volleyball or the band. School is about students, not teachers or coaches and certainly not about money machines, though that is the driving force for all of this. In words of the gone but not forgotten Susan Powter, "Stop The Insanity!"

donovan wrote:I do not see it at all as you do. This is not a case of hurting people's feelings or having someone stick around, etc. It is a situation of making the main point of college athletics as a part of the college experience and help develop young men and women in all aspects of life. I don't care if it the debate team, volleyball or the band. School is about students, not teachers or coaches and certainly not about money machines, though that is the driving force for all of this. In words of the gone but not forgotten Susan Powter, "Stop The Insanity!"

We agree. I believe that all non professional sports are about learning life lessons. Work ethic, fair play, fair competition, and teamwork. That doesn't mean that trying to be the best at what you do isn't important. The process of giving you all and achieving the most you can achieve, and pushing your limits are more important. The prize is in the process.

Which actually fuels my point of the University as a building block to develop young minds and prepare them for the real world.

It is Academia, true ... which is a place for higher learning.

At what point does protecting the student's university experience, then become involved in a world of societal endeavors? Post graduation?

If that is the case, then in my opinion, the University has failed to do its job.

.
.
.

We have 40 bowl games (80 spots)??? WHY???

Doesn't that dilute the Bowl System? And is that not their intention??

The first question was a serious one that I truly believe the answer to is YES. The second follows after I put on my @TinFoilHat

Derek wrote:We have 40 bowl games (80 spots)??? WHY???

Doesn't that dilute the Bowl System? And is that not their intention??

The first question was a serious one that I truly believe the answer to is YES. The second follows after I put on my @TinFoilHat

Ding, ding, ding...the head, the nail. Ridiculous amount of BG's.

There are a lot of ways to look at coaching changes and staying for the bowl game. There is some right on both sides, but teaching kids to finish what they start is way, way up there in my book. Heck most adults need lessons in this.

I heard Texas will not participate in the bowl game if invited. I have no clue if this is from the AD or whomever is considered coach at this point.