|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Nov 22, 2014 7:17:08 GMT -8
I don't think any team should get into a Bowl at 6-6. The fact that some teams do get in to Bowl games with non-winning records just shows that there are too many bowls. The bottom tier Bowls are pointless. Tell that to the players. Eeeeooor. So you think that 6-6 teams should be rewarded for utter mediocrity with Bowl game appearances? 6-6 is not a good record, and teams that end up with less than winning records should not be Bowl eligible. I understand that the system is already in place rewarding those teams, but just like the Poll system gave way to the BCS system which gave way to the Playoff system the rules should be changed to eliminate the 6-6 teams from Bowls. That change is highly unlikely to come, since that would mean that some of these Bowl games that are laughed at by the media and most college football fans would be eliminated, but that is what would give non-New Year's Day Bowl games more credibility and would make getting in to a Bowl game a bigger deal than it is now.
|
|
|
Post by Luchador El Guerrero Azteca on Nov 22, 2014 7:32:24 GMT -8
By Erik's logic, MWC would have zero teams in bowl games of the standard is New Years Day games. One one hand he says 7-5, then he moves the goal post. McQ had it right in the last post he had.
Sent from my Admiral Mark 01 Telegraph machine via Sputnik with dial-up
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 7:33:35 GMT -8
I certainly want the Aztecs to go bowling as do the majority of the cynics on this board. My, obviously, over the top reaction to the bowl games stem from people constantly equating being bowl eligible to having a successful season. It would be like people celebrating their wealth and success because they have a color television. When everyone had a color tv that stopped being a measure. Your analogy would be more accurate if instead of a color TV you chose something that only half of the population referenced had access. Not everyone goes to a bowl. Approximately 1/2 of the DI schools do. Perhaps a luxury car or a vacation home would be more appropriate? Woah there Pierpont. Half the population of what has access to "a luxury car or a vacation home?" Half the population hasn't been on a vacation in years and has never stayed in a place that didn't include the initials KOA or the phrase motorlodge. As far as luxury vehicle I think that a twelve year old dodge stratus is more equatable to our bowl games. It is better than walking or taking the bus but nothing get peacock strutting about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 7:37:08 GMT -8
total Defense 29 347.3 Rushing Defense 51 149.9 Passing Yards Allowed 23 197.4 PassEfficiency Defense 31 114.49 Scoring Defense 22 21.3
Defense is excellent and likely better next year. Offense needs a QB everything else is in place. You have to admire QK for his heart,those of you that have a heart.Yes we did not improve,the Quinn arm situation Ezell, Largent, Fely that was all planned by Rocky. Get a gripRocky ran a3-4-4 ion this game a 4-2-5 in another the better athletes he gets the more looks you will see.I am feeling much beter about the wr's next year we must have a viable QB if not the it all falls to the coaches. As for Bowl games there rewards for players and fun for fans. Football is a hard grueling sport thye deserve that.tha tis onece again if you have a heart.
|
|
|
Post by aztecforlife29 on Nov 22, 2014 7:42:01 GMT -8
Your analogy would be more accurate if instead of a color TV you chose something that only half of the population referenced had access. Not everyone goes to a bowl. Approximately 1/2 of the DI schools do. Perhaps a luxury car or a vacation home would be more appropriate? Woah there Pierpont. Half the population of what has access to "a luxury car or a vacation home?" Half the population hasn't been on a vacation in years and has never stayed in a place that didn't include the initials KOA or the phrase motorlodge. As far as luxury vehicle I think that a twelve year old dodge stratus is more equatable to our bowl games. It is better than walking or taking the bus but nothing get peacock strutting about. We are in division I football which is the "upper class" of divisions. Granted we may not be in the best conference but alas. We are in the top half (in terms of record) of the highest division if we go to a bowl game.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Nov 22, 2014 7:43:23 GMT -8
By Erik's logic, MWC would have zero teams in bowl games of the standard is New Years Day games. One one hand he says 7-5, then he moves the goal post. McQ had it right in the last post he had. Really? So you support 6-6 teams being rewarded for their mediocrity? ALL I'm saying is that no 6-6 team should be allowed in a Bowl game. A Bowl game is supposed to be a big deal. Going .500 is NOT a big deal. It is NOT a good record, and any team that goes .500 is NOT a good team deserving of a reward like a Bowl game appearance. Do you really disagree with that? I said NOTHING about the MWC and bowl games, nor did I say that non-New Year's Day Bowl games should be eliminated. I said that non-New Year's Day Bowl games would have more gravitas and get a lot more respect and would be a much bigger deal if they didn't have the spectre of non-winning teams playing in some of them. Maybe that would mean that 2 or 3 (maybe 4) of the 46 or so Bowl games would be eliminated, but that would be a good thing as the remaining Bowls would have more credibility and making it in to those Bowl games would then have more credibility. The MWC would still have 4 or 5 teams make Bowl games (depending on how each year shakes out). That's more than enough. Bowl games used to be for the elite. Now they don't mean squat if they aren't on New Year's Day. NO ONE outside of MWC fans (and fans of teams from other piddly ass conferences) cares about the New Orleans Bowl or the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl. Those Bowls are a joke to most college football fans. But eliminate the non-winning teams from being Bowl eligible and then the Non-New Year's Day Bowl games are more respectable, credible, and desirable.
|
|
|
Post by aztecforlife29 on Nov 22, 2014 7:45:28 GMT -8
By Erik's logic, MWC would have zero teams in bowl games of the standard is New Years Day games. One one hand he says 7-5, then he moves the goal post. McQ had it right in the last post he had. Really? So you support 6-6 teams being rewarded for their mediocrity? ALL I'm saying is that no 6-6 team should be allowed in a Bowl game. A Bowl game is supposed to be a big deal. Going .500 is NOT a big deal. It is NOT a good record, and any team that goes .500 is NOT a good team deserving of a reward like a Bowl game appearance. Do you really disagree with that? I said NOTHING about the MWC and bowl games, nor did I say that non-New Year's Day Bowl games should be eliminated. I said that non-New Year's Day Bowl games would have more gravitas and get a lot more respect and would be a much bigger deal if they didn't have the spectre of non-winning teams playing in some of them. Maybe that would mean that 2 or 3 (maybe 4) of the 46 or so Bowl games would be eliminated, but that would be a good thing as the remaining Bowls would have more credibility and making it in to those Bowl games would then have more credibility. The MWC would still have 4 or 5 teams make Bowl games (depending on how each year shakes out). That's more than enough. Bowl games used to be for the elite. Now they don't mean squat if they aren't on New Year's Day. NO ONE outside of MWC fans (and fans of teams from other piddly ass conferences) cares about the New Orleans Bowl or the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl. Those Bowls are a joke to most college football fans. But eliminate the non-winning teams from being Bowl eligible and then the Non-New Year's Day Bowl games are more respectable, credible, and desireable. If they go to an odd numbered schedule your problem is solved.
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Nov 22, 2014 8:23:28 GMT -8
We are bowl eligible with a shot at a conference title (mathematically at least) with a walk-on(twice) QB and ton of impact injuries.
Some of you guys sucks as fans.
|
|
|
Post by Luchador El Guerrero Azteca on Nov 22, 2014 8:25:50 GMT -8
We are bowl eligible with a shot at a conference title (mathematically at least) with a walk-on(twice) QB and ton of impact injuries. Some of you guys sucks as fans. Lost on them. Why bother? They have an agenda. Sent from my Admiral Mark 01 Telegraph machine via Sputnik with dial-up
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Nov 22, 2014 8:26:13 GMT -8
By Erik's logic, MWC would have zero teams in bowl games of the standard is New Years Day games. One one hand he says 7-5, then he moves the goal post. McQ had it right in the last post he had. Really? So you support 6-6 teams being rewarded for their mediocrity? ALL I'm saying is that no 6-6 team should be allowed in a Bowl game. A Bowl game is supposed to be a big deal. Going .500 is NOT a big deal. It is NOT a good record, and any team that goes .500 is NOT a good team deserving of a reward like a Bowl game appearance. Do you really disagree with that? I said NOTHING about the MWC and bowl games, nor did I say that non-New Year's Day Bowl games should be eliminated. I said that non-New Year's Day Bowl games would have more gravitas and get a lot more respect and would be a much bigger deal if they didn't have the spectre of non-winning teams playing in some of them. Maybe that would mean that 2 or 3 (maybe 4) of the 46 or so Bowl games would be eliminated, but that would be a good thing as the remaining Bowls would have more credibility and making it in to those Bowl games would then have more credibility. The MWC would still have 4 or 5 teams make Bowl games (depending on how each year shakes out). That's more than enough. Bowl games used to be for the elite. Now they don't mean squat if they aren't on New Year's Day. NO ONE outside of MWC fans (and fans of teams from other piddly ass conferences) cares about the New Orleans Bowl or the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl. Those Bowls are a joke to most college football fans. But eliminate the non-winning teams from being Bowl eligible and then the Non-New Year's Day Bowl games are more respectable, credible, and desirable. The old system had teams go 9-3 and still not make a bowl game. I rather have this system than being denied watching the Aztecs play in a bowl after going 9-3.
|
|
|
Post by Luchador El Guerrero Azteca on Nov 22, 2014 8:28:52 GMT -8
By Erik's logic, MWC would have zero teams in bowl games of the standard is New Years Day games. One one hand he says 7-5, then he moves the goal post. McQ had it right in the last post he had. Really? So you support 6-6 teams being rewarded for their mediocrity? ... Maybe that would mean that 2 or 3 (maybe 4) of the 46 or so Bowl games would be eliminated, but that would be a good thing as the remaining Bowls would have more credibility and making it in to those Bowl games would then have more credibility. The MWC would still have 4 or 5 teams make Bowl games (depending on how each year shakes out). That's more than enough. ... Bowl games used to be for the elite. Now they don't mean squat if they aren't on New Year's Day. NO ONE outside of MWC fans (and fans of teams from other piddly ass conferences) cares about the New Orleans Bowl or the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl. Those Bowls are a joke to most college football fans. You completely ignored my point previous about what the players thought about the low tier game they played in list year. Agenda... I could give a rat what fans outside of the MWC think. Why do you care? Hmmm? I care about what our players think, apparently you don't per your logic. Again, agenda in play. It's quite apparent. Sent from my Admiral Mark 01 Telegraph machine via Sputnik with dial-up
|
|
|
Post by Luchador El Guerrero Azteca on Nov 22, 2014 8:29:45 GMT -8
Really? So you support 6-6 teams being rewarded for their mediocrity? ALL I'm saying is that no 6-6 team should be allowed in a Bowl game. A Bowl game is supposed to be a big deal. Going .500 is NOT a big deal. It is NOT a good record, and any team that goes .500 is NOT a good team deserving of a reward like a Bowl game appearance. Do you really disagree with that? I said NOTHING about the MWC and bowl games, nor did I say that non-New Year's Day Bowl games should be eliminated. I said that non-New Year's Day Bowl games would have more gravitas and get a lot more respect and would be a much bigger deal if they didn't have the spectre of non-winning teams playing in some of them. Maybe that would mean that 2 or 3 (maybe 4) of the 46 or so Bowl games would be eliminated, but that would be a good thing as the remaining Bowls would have more credibility and making it in to those Bowl games would then have more credibility. The MWC would still have 4 or 5 teams make Bowl games (depending on how each year shakes out). That's more than enough. Bowl games used to be for the elite. Now they don't mean squat if they aren't on New Year's Day. NO ONE outside of MWC fans (and fans of teams from other piddly ass conferences) cares about the New Orleans Bowl or the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl. Those Bowls are a joke to most college football fans. But eliminate the non-winning teams from being Bowl eligible and then the Non-New Year's Day Bowl games are more respectable, credible, and desirable. The old system had teams go 9-3 and still not make a bowl game. I rather have this system than being denied watching the Aztecs play in a bowl after going 9-3. We were 10-2 and stayed home one year. Sent from my Admiral Mark 01 Telegraph machine via Sputnik with dial-up
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Nov 22, 2014 8:30:10 GMT -8
Really? So you support 6-6 teams being rewarded for their mediocrity? ALL I'm saying is that no 6-6 team should be allowed in a Bowl game. A Bowl game is supposed to be a big deal. Going .500 is NOT a big deal. It is NOT a good record, and any team that goes .500 is NOT a good team deserving of a reward like a Bowl game appearance. Do you really disagree with that? I said NOTHING about the MWC and bowl games, nor did I say that non-New Year's Day Bowl games should be eliminated. I said that non-New Year's Day Bowl games would have more gravitas and get a lot more respect and would be a much bigger deal if they didn't have the spectre of non-winning teams playing in some of them. Maybe that would mean that 2 or 3 (maybe 4) of the 46 or so Bowl games would be eliminated, but that would be a good thing as the remaining Bowls would have more credibility and making it in to those Bowl games would then have more credibility. The MWC would still have 4 or 5 teams make Bowl games (depending on how each year shakes out). That's more than enough. Bowl games used to be for the elite. Now they don't mean squat if they aren't on New Year's Day. NO ONE outside of MWC fans (and fans of teams from other piddly ass conferences) cares about the New Orleans Bowl or the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl. Those Bowls are a joke to most college football fans. But eliminate the non-winning teams from being Bowl eligible and then the Non-New Year's Day Bowl games are more respectable, credible, and desirable. The old system had teams go 9-3 and still not make a bowl game. I rather have this system than being denied watching the Aztecs play in a bowl after going 9-3. We all want better for the Aztecs. But, when we have a potentially terrible year which would happen to most FBS teams starting a walk on QB, who is injured we qualified for a bowl. Am I upset at our coaching staff for not having any back-ups in place that weren't freshman? Hell yes! However, you can't cry over that once the season starts. They did some patch work junk with the offense and filled the gaps decently with the rash of injuries on defense. The players stepped up big with all the obstacles they faced. Just a few short years ago, this would be a miracle on the Mesa with the conditions this team faced. Now it's a reason to fire Rocky in the eyes of the same fans.
|
|
|
Post by dtay2004 on Nov 22, 2014 8:29:52 GMT -8
I'm happy(and surprised) that some SDSU fans have reached the level of under appreciation for bowl games this fast. Getting to a bowl game was just a dream 6-7 years ago, now making it to a bowl game isn't good enough. What im more excited about is the talent level that has improved over the past 5 years. Winning,Successful programs are always built from the inside out,Something SDSU has done a great job at improving in the past 5 years. Skill players come and go but when you have a offensive line that can push people around and get them tired come 4th quarter, you have yourself a successful formula that should continue years down the line. Having a nice record for 1 year is good and all but can that level of success be maintained year in and year out? I think SDSU is heading towards the right direction and I'm excited to see how things work out in the near future.
|
|
|
Post by aztecron on Nov 22, 2014 8:31:06 GMT -8
Most Bowl games are simply another game on the schedule nowadays. You want to be in one no matter what. I don't care if it's the bum-fuh bowl in Siberia. Get on ESPN, get the practice days, get the special treatment, get the team building events during bowl week. Get it every year. Things will get better when you can show recruits bowl games are the norm. All important, but those 15 extra practices are vital, it's as if we get another spring practice session by going to a bowl game every year.
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Nov 22, 2014 8:31:31 GMT -8
The old system had teams go 9-3 and still not make a bowl game. I rather have this system than being denied watching the Aztecs play in a bowl after going 9-3. We were 10-2 and stayed home one year. Sent from my Admiral Mark 01 Telegraph machine via Sputnik with dial-up WYO did too that same year and yBu was 6th but got snubbed in the old Bowl Alliance.
|
|
|
Post by aztecron on Nov 22, 2014 8:32:54 GMT -8
By Erik's logic, MWC would have zero teams in bowl games of the standard is New Years Day games. One one hand he says 7-5, then he moves the goal post. McQ had it right in the last post he had. Really? So you support 6-6 teams being rewarded for their mediocrity? ALL I'm saying is that no 6-6 team should be allowed in a Bowl game. A Bowl game is supposed to be a big deal. Going .500 is NOT a big deal. It is NOT a good record, and any team that goes .500 is NOT a good team deserving of a reward like a Bowl game appearance. Do you really disagree with that? I said NOTHING about the MWC and bowl games, nor did I say that non-New Year's Day Bowl games should be eliminated. I said that non-New Year's Day Bowl games would have more gravitas and get a lot more respect and would be a much bigger deal if they didn't have the spectre of non-winning teams playing in some of them. Maybe that would mean that 2 or 3 (maybe 4) of the 46 or so Bowl games would be eliminated, but that would be a good thing as the remaining Bowls would have more credibility and making it in to those Bowl games would then have more credibility. The MWC would still have 4 or 5 teams make Bowl games (depending on how each year shakes out). That's more than enough. Bowl games used to be for the elite. Now they don't mean squat if they aren't on New Year's Day. NO ONE outside of MWC fans (and fans of teams from other piddly ass conferences) cares about the New Orleans Bowl or the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl. Those Bowls are a joke to most college football fans. But eliminate the non-winning teams from being Bowl eligible and then the Non-New Year's Day Bowl games are more respectable, credible, and desirable. But that's not possible in today's bowl environment, 6-6 is eligible, and teams do go. So your point is moot. It doesn't matter what you wish in regards to the current bowl setup.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Nov 22, 2014 8:36:09 GMT -8
The old system had teams go 9-3 and still not make a bowl game. I rather have this system than being denied watching the Aztecs play in a bowl after going 9-3. We were 10-2 and stayed home one year. 8-3 & 8-4 in '95 & '96 and no Bowls. 10-1 in '76 & '77 and no Bowls. But that's a far cry from 6-6. To be Bowl eligible it should be 7 wins. The number of Bowls should be adjusted to match the average number of teams that win 7 games or more per year (divided by two, of course, which would mean eliminating 2-4 Bowl games that carry zero prestige with most fans and media members). Under that scenario the Aztecs would never find themselves on the outside when they have a winning season. That's as it should be. Reward winning teams, that's what the Bowl system should be all about.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 8:40:55 GMT -8
Yes I disagree with you Erik 100% eh. In all this rankings and mythical national championships we lose sight of the fact that college football is a sport that's played by college students who put a tremendous amount of time and energy into their sport. It's a brutal sport with injuries abounding and you have to play with those pains. The smaller bowl games are merely celebrations of football, these comments about rewarding mediocrity don't take into account the violence and sacrifice of the game. This is not a professional sport. If some of you have ever played college football, or college hockey, or college rugby you know the pounding you take the love of the sport. But some teams may go six and six because key players were injured or they were grossly over scheduled. The approach that the bowls must represent some sort of superior standard is about 20 years too late. Anyone who has played the sport or has had a sono nephew play can tell you that the rewards are few and the pains are many.
All this trying to reach the top denies the fact that the elite teams in the FBS are simply much better and much more professional than the others. That's why in the four years that Rocky has been coach the Mountian West has won 18% of their games against them. Let the bowls in the NCAA set the standards. And you just sit back and watch the game.instead of pondering the merits of the bowl game just think of it as somebody's kid out there getting wined and dined and having an experience of a lifetime. That to me is more valuable than worrying about the mediocrity of the team and pontificating about the value of the bowl. There's a lot worse things in college football for one all those ridiculous celebrations and taunting, and trash talking. My all-time favorite is a Utah player who dropped the ball before he went to the end zone and then did his gangster thing in front of the fans.
|
|
|
Post by zollner on Nov 22, 2014 8:41:21 GMT -8
6-6 Makes you bowl eligible doesn't mean your going to be invited to a bowl game.
|
|