The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

SBNation may hate CMU more than we do. Their updated bowl projections leave CMU out but include Akron at 6-6. They've left CMU out the last week or two as well. Do they have something against them or is this just sloppy work? I don't think Akron could jump CMU for a bowl bid. Something weird here.

Likely just sloppy work

They know probation is coming from our ever so active rules enforcement committee at the NCAA.

(11-16-2014 11:07 AM)Broncos83 Wrote:  SBNation may hate CMU more than we do. Their updated bowl projections leave CMU out but include Akron at 6-6. They've left CMU out the last week or two as well. Do they have something against them or is this just sloppy work? I don't think Akron could jump CMU for a bowl bid. Something weird here.

Said it before, but Akron is a more attractive selection than CMU for many reasons. It wouldn't surprise me to see a bowl game pick Akron over CMU (other than maybe the Quick Lane Bowl in Detroit) if the two are one win apart. Akron has everything CMU doesn't have:

1) a turnaround story 2) head coach with name recognition 3) big T.V. market

Cant pick 6 win team over a 7 win team

(11-16-2014 11:14 AM)Kimbosucks Wrote:  Cant pick 6 win team over a 7 win team

For sure, I was just going to look into that?

(11-16-2014 11:14 AM)Kimbosucks Wrote:  Cant pick 6 win team over a 7 win team

Is that a new rule change that I'm not aware of? It's happened in the past...

(11-16-2014 11:14 AM)Kimbosucks Wrote:  Cant pick 6 win team over a 7 win team

I think that only is valid for at-large picks. Conference affiliations I think can pick the bowl eligible conference team they want in the order they are allowed to pick.

I haven't checked after yesterday, but they were getting dangerously close to having not enough eligible teams, so every team at least 6-6 would be bowling.

Bowden or Enos? Easy call

A sleepy one horse town market or Cleveland Metro? Obvious

ESPN is probably sick about having to gloss over the Rawls story every week.

"We're going to take it down on the field to our sideline analyst Chuck Snotter. Chuck what have you got."

"Thanks guys. We've all heard the story of the young man who transferred from Michigan to play his last year of football. He's a great back, who made a big mistake and stole an old ladies purse, but he's learned his lesson and is back playing for the Chippewas. It's a heartwarming tale of youth and remorse.
Back up to the booth."

"Thanks Chuck, that is a tear jerker. Now back to live action. THERE GOES RAWLS, he's at midfield, he could take it to the house......OH NO, it looks like he just blew a hammy! He looks in terrible pain. That might be it for him. Boy, that's an unfortunate break for Dan Enos and the Chips. Let's go to a break."

Quote:Said it before, but Akron is a more attractive selection than CMU for many reasons. It wouldn't surprise me to see a bowl game pick Akron over CMU

A 6-6 team can't be picked over a 7+ win team. Against the rules. It's been around for at least a couple years.

Which is why I WANT UofM to go 6-6 and not 5-7. They'd only get a preference over another 6-6 B1G team (like Northwestern). I want to see UM in the Quick Lane bowl -- with us a chance to play against them in that!

That's not accurate todd

(11-16-2014 03:00 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Said it before, but Akron is a more attractive selection than CMU for many reasons. It wouldn't surprise me to see a bowl game pick Akron over CMU

A 6-6 team can't be picked over a 7+ win team. Against the rules. It's been around for at least a couple years.

Which is why I WANT UofM to go 6-6 and not 5-7. They'd only get a preference over another 6-6 B1G team (like Northwestern). I want to see UM in the Quick Lane bowl -- with us a chance to play against them in that!

Interesting match up who here thinks WMU can beat um in the Quick Lane Bowl? And if such a match up came to pass are we looking at 60,000 plus attendance? what say you?

Quote:That's not accurate todd

What's not accurate? That a 6-6 team can't be chosen before/prior to a 7-5 team from the same conference, in conference bowl tie-ins?

Quote: Bowl games that have a contract with a conference must select a team with at least seven wins if one is available.

Any bowl berths that become eligible when a conference fails to meet its contracted tie-ins must first be filled by any eligible seven-win teams before any remaining FBS 6–6 teams can be accommodated.

Additionally, conferences are not allowed to sign contingency agreements with bowl games that would allow 6–6 teams from their conferences to receive bowl berths at the expense of any potential team with seven or more wins. While this does not prevent conferences from signing contingency agreements that are triggered when a second conference is unable to provide enough eligible teams to fill all of its contracted berths, it does not allow a 6–6 team from the contingency conference access to a bowl game over a seven win team from a third conference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowl_eligibility

(11-16-2014 03:00 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:Said it before, but Akron is a more attractive selection than CMU for many reasons. It wouldn't surprise me to see a bowl game pick Akron over CMU

A 6-6 team can't be picked over a 7+ win team. Against the rules. It's been around for at least a couple years.

todd, unless I'm completely mistaken (certainly possible), I've never seen or heard of such a rule. Do you have any reference or proof of this?

http://www.cleveland.com/sports/college/...ms_st.html

Quote:...there is no pecking order beyond the GoDaddy Bowl in Mobile, Alabama on Jan. 4, 2015, getting its pick of the litter. And there is no guarantee, beyond five, that all MAC bowl eligible teams get to a bowl game.

Quote:Beyond that, the individual bowls, through gentle nudging from the conference office, pick the teams they want, in no particular order.

Do I think all of the MAC's eligible teams will get a bowl selection? Probably... but by no means is it a foregone conclusion.

(11-16-2014 03:03 PM)EA3 Wrote:  That's not accurate todd

Moderator!

(11-16-2014 03:13 PM)Hiller4Hyz09 Wrote:  

(11-16-2014 03:03 PM)EA3 Wrote:  That's not accurate todd

Moderator!

And I hope I don't get banned by my last post right up there explaining it and putting things in bold! :)

Quote:todd, unless I'm completely mistaken (certainly possible), I've never seen or heard of such a rule. Do you have any reference or proof of this?

Yeah, we posted at the same time basically. Look above your last one -- it's Wiki about bowl eligibility.

(11-16-2014 03:18 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

(11-16-2014 03:13 PM)Hiller4Hyz09 Wrote:  

(11-16-2014 03:03 PM)EA3 Wrote:  That's not accurate todd

Moderator!

And I hope I don't get banned by my last post right up there explaining it and putting things in bold! :)

Quote:todd, unless I'm completely mistaken (certainly possible), I've never seen or heard of such a rule. Do you have any reference or proof of this?

Yeah, we posted at the same time basically. Look above your last one -- it's Wiki about bowl eligibility.

You'll be ok if your retraction passes.

(11-16-2014 03:10 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote: Bowl games that have a contract with a conference must select a team with at least seven wins if one is available.

Any bowl berths that become eligible when a conference fails to meet its contracted tie-ins must first be filled by any eligible seven-win teams before any remaining FBS 6–6 teams can be accommodated.

Additionally, conferences are not allowed to sign contingency agreements with bowl games that would allow 6–6 teams from their conferences to receive bowl berths at the expense of any potential team with seven or more wins. While this does not prevent conferences from signing contingency agreements that are triggered when a second conference is unable to provide enough eligible teams to fill all of its contracted berths, it does not allow a 6–6 team from the contingency conference access to a bowl game over a seven win team from a third conference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowl_eligibility

todd,

1. you are citing wikipedia

2. Leading up to the three bullet points you posted above, it says this: "Before the 2010–11 season, the Division I rulebook, specifically Bylaw 30.9.2.1, had several provisions that attempted to ensure that teams with seven wins will receive preference for bowl bids:[4]"

(footnote 4 references the 2009-2010 NCAA Div. 1 User Manual)