• The KillerFrogs

Are we going to a bowl game?

Limey Frog

Limey Frog

Full Member
Moose Stuff said:
I’ve never understood this line of this thinking at all. The main reason this board exists and the reason for most of us posting on it is TCU football. How in the hell is another TCU football game a bad thing exactky?
Click to expand...

It's not that another TCU football game is bad, as such. It's just a matter of taking a bigger-picture view. By this logic we might just extend the season to thirteen games and put everyone in a bowl no matter what just to make every fan-base happy. The point is whether those games are meaningful. Yes, it would be nice if you could make the Rose Bowl every year, but winning the Rose Bowl was only as great as it was because you don't go 13-0 every year. The college post-season sucks right now because the bowls are meaningless and only four teams get to play in the thing that is meaningful. I think the bowls would be meaningful again if getting there was a significant and rare achievement (personally I'd limit bowls to teams with nine wins, but I could live with eight). I'd probably expand the playoff to six teams (auto-bids for P5 teams plus the G5 conference champ with the best record; I'd give a bye to the two teams with the best records vs. FBS opponents, with losses vs. FBS opponents counting as better than a win vs. FCS).
 
W

Wexahu

Full Member
tcumaniac said:
or at the very least, 6 FBS wins.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think this is what it should be (and what it once was I believe). It would have two benefits....1) keep bad teams out of bowl games therefore making it a little more meaningful to be a bowl team and 2) dis-incentivize teams from scheduling those awful time-waste FCS games. In fact, you'd probably see them almost all go away immediately. Good riddance.
 
Eight

Eight

Member
BABYFACE said:
Speaking of TE’s, isn’t great how many times Wells and Lynn have been targeted this season compared to year’s past. Of course, I would like to see them targeted more.
Click to expand...

granted, the combined numbers of 28 catches, 291 yards, and 6 td's from the frogs 3 tight ends might not sound like much, but when you compare them to 7 catches for 48 yards in 2018 it is a regular offensive explosion.

do agree we need to work them more the next 3 games
 
Peacefrog

Peacefrog

Degenerate
Limey Frog said:
It's not that another TCU football game is bad, as such. It's just a matter of taking a bigger-picture view. By this logic we might just extend the season to thirteen games and put everyone in a bowl no matter what just to make every fan-base happy. The point is whether those games are meaningful. Yes, it would be nice if you could make the Rose Bowl every year, but winning the Rose Bowl was only as great as it was because you don't go 13-0 every year. The college post-season sucks right now because the bowls are meaningless and only four teams get to play in the thing that is meaningful. I think the bowls would be meaningful again if getting there was a significant and rare achievement (personally I'd limit bowls to teams with nine wins, but I could live with eight). I'd probably expand the playoff to six teams (auto-bids for P5 teams plus the G5 conference champ with the best record; I'd give a bye to the two teams with the best records vs. FBS opponents, with losses vs. FBS opponents counting as better than a win vs. FCS).
Click to expand...
The two recent Alamo Bowls weren’t meaningless to a whole lot of people. In reality neither was the Cheez-It Bowl. It doesn’t have to be for a championship to mean something to players and fans. Bowls are great. Not playing in a bowl sucks.
 
P

puckster59

Active Member
The problem is too many meaningless bowls. They're going to exist whether a 6-6 TCU goes or not. They've already been taking 5-7 teams to fill open slots when there aren't enough 6-6 teams. Don't really think the Artichoke Juice Bowl is going to care about adding another 5-7 if a 6-6 declines.
 
Limey Frog

Limey Frog

Full Member
Peacefrog said:
The two recent Alamo Bowls weren’t meaningless to a whole lot of people. In reality neither was the Cheez-It Bowl. It doesn’t have to be for a championship to mean something to players and fans. Bowls are great. Not playing in a bowl sucks.
Click to expand...

We had won 10 games to get into those bowls.
 
Froggish

Froggish

Active Member
puckster59 said:
The problem is too many meaningless bowls. They're going to exist whether a 6-6 TCU goes or not. They've already been taking 5-7 teams to fill open slots when there aren't enough 6-6 teams. Don't really think the Artichoke Juice Bowl is going to care about adding another 5-7 if a 6-6 declines.
Click to expand...

Where exactly is the Artichoke Juice bowl located?...I want to get my tix now
 
Brog

Brog

Full Member
puckster59 said:
The problem is too many meaningless bowls. They're going to exist whether a 6-6 TCU goes or not. They've already been taking 5-7 teams to fill open slots when there aren't enough 6-6 teams. Don't really think the Artichoke Juice Bowl is going to care about adding another 5-7 if a 6-6 declines.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but I don't think they were meaningless to the teams involved and/or their fans.
 
Limey Frog

Limey Frog

Full Member
Peacefrog said:
You said all bowl games were meaningless except the CFP. How many games we won to get into those bowl games is irrelevant to your statement.
Click to expand...

That was a bit of an over-statement; I wasn't very clear. To clarify: I think the preponderance of clutter because of the excessive number of meaningless games crowds out and diminishes the value of what was once an more meaningful post-season structure. If there were only around ten or so bowl games, all between nine-win teams or better, then people would pay more attention, they'd generate more excitement and be more inherently meaningful. Personally, I found it meaningful to beat Stanford/Oregon in the Alamo Bowl; limping past Cal in the Cheeze-it Bowl was good for nothing but gallows humor. Right now there are about eighteen Cheeze-it Bowls.
 
Peacefrog

Peacefrog

Degenerate
Limey Frog said:
That was a bit of an over-statement; I wasn't very clear. To clarify: I think the preponderance of clutter because of the excessive number of meaningless games crowds out and diminishes the value of what was once an more meaningful post-season structure. If there were only around ten or so bowl games, all between nine-win teams or better, then people would pay more attention, they'd generate more excitement and be more inherently meaningful. Personally, I found it meaningful to beat Stanford/Oregon in the Alamo Bowl; limping past Cal in the Cheeze-it Bowl was good for nothing but gallows humor. Right now there are about eighteen Cheeze-it Bowls.
Click to expand...
This I agree with for the most part. But there are from to time very enjoyable bowl games between mediocre teams. And the more college football the better as far as I’m concerned. I’ll watch any of it.
 
Brog

Brog

Full Member
Well I can remember very well when there were only five bowl games: Orange, Rose, Cotton, Sugar and Sun. Then came Liberty, first at Philadelphia, 1959, later moved to Memphis. Independence Bowl, Shreveport, 1976. And after that the deluge. Now there are 41 (that's forty-one!) bowl games. (And for the record I was at the 1956 Cotton Bowl which we lost 14-13. Ole Miss the opponent. That's the one where our quarterback Chuck Curtis who was instructed NOT to receive the opening kickoff, did exactly that, was tackled hard and broke three ribs and didn't play another down. We led 13-0, but you can guess the rest. Final score 14-13. Some of us have been suffering a LONG LONG time!)
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top