With a pair of 8-3 teams facing off against a pair of 6-5 teams, which is better in your eyes for the conference. Put aside any personal preferences, and what would be better:

1. Pair of 9-3 teams, pair of 6-6 teams.

2. One 9-3, one 8-4, one 7-5, one 6-6.

3. Pair of 8-4, pair of 7-5.

#1 assumes both Troy and MTSU win.

#2 assumes one of them does, and one of them doesn't.

#3 assumes ULM and UL win.

Personally, I think a pair of 9 win teams, with both having the chance to get to 10 wins in a bowl game, is better for the conference than the pairs of 8-4 and 7-5. Big, big improvement over last year where you had one team at 8-4, and 3 left at 6-6.

But I see that having 4 "winning" teams would also be great. But would leave no team with a shot at double-digit wins.

The only other option would be to have 3 winning teams and one left at 6-6, but that would still leave 4 bowl eligible, but just 3 with winning records.

I would go with option 1 also...a pair of 9-3 teams would speak volumes for this conference, considering Troy's three losses are to Florida, Arkansas (pair of SEC school) and their opener.

Would be nice to have 3 teams bowling, in my opinion

(11-23-2009 12:44 PM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  Would be nice to have 3 teams bowling, in my opinion

Yeah, it would. But I think a pair with a shot at 10 win seasons outweighs the possibility of 3 bowling.

(11-23-2009 12:44 PM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  Would be nice to have 3 teams bowling, in my opinion

:iagree:

I we could get 3 in bowling that would be huge. So my vote would be option 2.

HOWEVER if there is no shot at a 3rd bowl team, then I would want option 1.

Under option 1 is it POSSIBLE that the non confrence champion would be sitting home at 9-3?

(11-23-2009 12:47 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  Under option 1 is it POSSIBLE that the non confrence champion would be sitting home at 9-3?

Don't think so. I'm pretty sure an option will be open for at least the 2nd place team. Not sure about 2 spots opening up though.

(11-23-2009 12:40 PM)RDA Trojan Wrote:  With a pair of 8-3 teams facing off against a pair of 6-5 teams, which is better in your eyes for the conference. Put aside any personal preferences, and what would be better:

1. Pair of 9-3 teams, pair of 6-6 teams.

2. One 9-3, one 8-4, one 7-5, one 6-6.

3. Pair of 8-4, pair of 7-5.

#1 assumes both Troy and MTSU win.

#2 assumes one of them does, and one of them doesn't.

#3 assumes ULM and UL win.

Personally, I think a pair of 9 win teams, with both having the chance to get to 10 wins in a bowl game, is better for the conference than the pairs of 8-4 and 7-5. Big, big improvement over last year where you had one team at 8-4, and 3 left at 6-6.

But I see that having 4 "winning" teams would also be great. But would leave no team with a shot at double-digit wins.

The only other option would be to have 3 winning teams and one left at 6-6, but that would still leave 4 bowl eligible, but just 3 with winning records.

Every conference has strong & weak teams. We need to have at least 3 teams with 7 or more wins each and every year. 1. will raise the perception of the conference 2. allow for the possibility of 3 bowl participants. The better our teams are at the top, the better overall success for the conference.

whether it's 1, 2, 3 or 8 teams going bowling in the SBC... I don't think it means squat unless you win the bowl game. So whoever goes bowling... JUST WIN!

I don't care if we get two or three or four in a bowl unless the number of bowl losses = 0.

option 2, with MT losing.. not Troy.

I guess option 2...but most importantly, winning those bowl games.

I guess if we could get 3 in a bowl, and all 3 win, it would be better overall for the conference than just two going bowling. But I feel that both teams would be tasting that 10th win in that scenario so bad that it would take something miraculous to stop them.

I just don't feel like either of the Lousiana SBC schools would have a great shot at winning a bowl game. It could very easily happen, and I could be way wrong. But I think the best thing is for 2 schools to do great, instead of one do great, one do okay, and one squeak in. Heck, depending on opponents, if Troy and MTSU both win out and win bowl games, and get to 10 wins, both could be ranked, which would be a first. To me, a 9 win team from the SBC isn't going to get ranked, but 10 could do it.

(11-23-2009 04:58 PM)RDA Trojan Wrote:  I guess if we could get 3 in a bowl, and all 3 win, it would be better overall for the conference than just two going bowling. But I feel that both teams would be tasting that 10th win in that scenario so bad that it would take something miraculous to stop them.

I just don't feel like either of the Lousiana SBC schools would have a great shot at winning a bowl game. It could very easily happen, and I could be way wrong. But I think the best thing is for 2 schools to do great, instead of one do great, one do okay, and one squeak in. Heck, depending on opponents, if Troy and MTSU both win out and win bowl games, and get to 10 wins, both could be ranked, which would be a first. To me, a 9 win team from the SBC isn't going to get ranked, but 10 could do it.

If we see a Sun Belt football team ranked in the top 25 at the end of a season (it won't be this one) I'd think it might be possible for a 1 - loss team, but a team with 3 losses, no way.

MTSU,

Yes it is possible that MTSU sits at home even with a 9-3 record. The only bowl that will for certain have an open slot is GMAC.

The MAC will have an extra 7-5 team or two and there are scenerios where CUSA and/or the WAC could as well.

The biggest thing MTSU has going for it is the MAC already has one side of the GMAC bowl filled (Pizza bowl too for that matter). Bowls and ESPN don't usually like conference games. Especially super hot MAC on MAC action. They have that every night of the week.

Even with only one week left, there are still tons of things that can happen to affect the bowl situation. A lot of it won't be decided until the at-large BCS bowl bids are given out.

In the end though, I think there will be a spot for MTSU.

please you will definitely get two in with those records. In the past maybe not but there will be alot of excess spots.

Looks like the possible pair of 10 win teams is it. I hate that the bowl stuff is still up in the air like it is, but if it means that they are trying to get each school to the best spot for them, and perhaps a 3rd team in a bowl, I'm all for it.

(11-30-2009 10:39 AM)RDA Trojan Wrote:  Looks like the possible pair of 10 win teams is it. I hate that the bowl stuff is still up in the air like it is, but if it means that they are trying to get each school to the best spot for them, and perhaps a 3rd team in a bowl, I'm all for it.

Third bowl is out of the realm of possibility unless UCLA elects to stay home.