(01-06-2016 03:05 PM)HERDDDDD Wrote:  Marshall has a major bowl win MOTOR CITY

Beat a powerful #25 ranked BYU

It was glorious two ranked teams exchanging blows it had to be a "major bowl" cuz both teams we're ranked & we finished #10.

It "would have been NY6 game had that system been implemented"

ECU is going to have an easier time selling their "Peach Bowl" win as a big thing, since the Peach Bowl is now a big thing; than Marshall will with their "Motor City Bowl", which may or may not exist anymore, depending on how you look at it.

On the other hand, Randy Moss.

Good point about "two ranked teams make a major bowl" though.

(01-06-2016 01:19 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  Eh, I don't have enough skin in this game anyways. I don't necessarily believe that the '92 Peach Bowl was held in any higher esteem overall then than it was during the BCS era. It was the best of the bowls that weren't in the National Championship rotation, though, during that Bowl Alliance era or whatever it was called.

No it wasn't. The Citrus Bowl always had better matchups than the Peach Bowl, and other bowls did on a yearly basis as well.

The Peach Bowl in the 1990s was just a run-of-the-mill second tier bowl. Nothing special.

Let's compare the Peach to the Citrus bowl in terms of matchups, from 1991 - 1997. It's not even close, the Citrus has better matchups every single year:

1991 Peach: #12 (ECU) vs #21
1991 Citrus: #13 vs #14

1992 Peach: #19 vs unranked
1992 Citrus: #8 vs #15

1993 Peach: #24 vs unranked
1993 Citrus: #6 vs #13

1994 Peach: #16 vs #23
1994 Citrus: #6 vs #13

1995 Peach: #18 vs unranked
1995 Citrus: #4 vs #8

1996 Peach: #17 vs unranked
1996 Citrus: #9 vs #11

1997 Peach: #13 vs unranked
1997 Citrus: #6 vs #11

Would you ECU fans please stop making these unfounded claims? It's embarrassing.

ECU has 2 Citrus Bowl trophies to its name as well. Either way you wanna do it Quo.

(01-06-2016 04:07 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  ECU has 2 Citrus Bowl trophies to its name as well. Either way you wanna do it Quo.

They dont have good corn dogs at the citrus bowl. Quo mad

(01-06-2016 04:07 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  ECU has 2 Citrus Bowl trophies to its name as well. Either way you wanna do it Quo.

No you don't, you have two Tangerine Bowl wins, over the Mighty Powers UMass and Maine.

The Tangerine Bowl was a 3rd-tier bowl, even lower on the rung than the Peach. Decades later, it was overhauled and upgraded to the Citrus Bowl.

First, ECU fans try to claim a second-tier bowl win in 1992 is now a Major Bowl win, and now you try to claim 3rd-tier bowl wins in the 1960s as equal to a second-tier bowl win.

Amazing what these ECU fans will do to puff up their record.

(01-06-2016 04:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 04:07 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  ECU has 2 Citrus Bowl trophies to its name as well. Either way you wanna do it Quo.

No you don't, you have two Tangerine Bowl wins, over the Mighty Powers UMass and Maine.

The Tangerine Bowl was a 3rd-tier bowl, even lower on the rung than the Peach. Decades later, it was overhauled and upgraded to the Citrus Bowl.

First, ECU fans try to claim a second-tier bowl win in 1992 is now a Major Bowl win, and now you try to claim 3rd-tier bowl wins in the 1960s as equal to a second-tier bowl win.

Amazing what these ECU fans will do to puff up their record.

The Tangerine was simply re-named the Citrus. Its the same bowl. Furthermore, third-tier? There were only NINE bowl games when we played in the Citrus (Tangerine).

(01-06-2016 03:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 01:19 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  Eh, I don't have enough skin in this game anyways. I don't necessarily believe that the '92 Peach Bowl was held in any higher esteem overall then than it was during the BCS era. It was the best of the bowls that weren't in the National Championship rotation, though, during that Bowl Alliance era or whatever it was called.

No it wasn't. The Citrus Bowl always had better matchups than the Peach Bowl, and other bowls did on a yearly basis as well.

The Peach Bowl in the 1990s was just a run-of-the-mill second tier bowl. Nothing special.

Let's compare the Peach to the Citrus bowl in terms of matchups, from 1991 - 1997. It's not even close, the Citrus has better matchups every single year:

1991 Peach: #12 (ECU) vs #21
1991 Citrus: #13 vs #14

1992 Peach: #19 vs unranked
1992 Citrus: #8 vs #15

1993 Peach: #24 vs unranked
1993 Citrus: #6 vs #13

1994 Peach: #16 vs #23
1994 Citrus: #6 vs #13

1995 Peach: #18 vs unranked
1995 Citrus: #4 vs #8

1996 Peach: #17 vs unranked
1996 Citrus: #9 vs #11

1997 Peach: #13 vs unranked
1997 Citrus: #6 vs #11

Would you ECU fans please stop making these unfounded claims? It's embarrassing.

hey - chill, would ya? It's not that big of a deal. It amazes me the obscure, unimportant arguments you get all hyped up for. You're correct, I'm incorrect. I've already gone on record as saying that I was wrong in the original comment that I made.

(01-06-2016 04:34 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 03:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 01:19 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  Eh, I don't have enough skin in this game anyways. I don't necessarily believe that the '92 Peach Bowl was held in any higher esteem overall then than it was during the BCS era. It was the best of the bowls that weren't in the National Championship rotation, though, during that Bowl Alliance era or whatever it was called.

No it wasn't. The Citrus Bowl always had better matchups than the Peach Bowl, and other bowls did on a yearly basis as well.

The Peach Bowl in the 1990s was just a run-of-the-mill second tier bowl. Nothing special.

Let's compare the Peach to the Citrus bowl in terms of matchups, from 1991 - 1997. It's not even close, the Citrus has better matchups every single year:

1991 Peach: #12 (ECU) vs #21
1991 Citrus: #13 vs #14

1992 Peach: #19 vs unranked
1992 Citrus: #8 vs #15

1993 Peach: #24 vs unranked
1993 Citrus: #6 vs #13

1994 Peach: #16 vs #23
1994 Citrus: #6 vs #13

1995 Peach: #18 vs unranked
1995 Citrus: #4 vs #8

1996 Peach: #17 vs unranked
1996 Citrus: #9 vs #11

1997 Peach: #13 vs unranked
1997 Citrus: #6 vs #11

Would you ECU fans please stop making these unfounded claims? It's embarrassing.

hey - chill, would ya? It's not that big of a deal. It amazes me the obscure, unimportant arguments you get all hyped up for. You're correct, I'm incorrect. I've already gone on record as saying that I was wrong in the original comment that I made.

Sorry, i missed your earlier mea culpa. My apologies.

(01-06-2016 03:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 01:19 PM)PiratePanther189 Wrote:  Eh, I don't have enough skin in this game anyways. I don't necessarily believe that the '92 Peach Bowl was held in any higher esteem overall then than it was during the BCS era. It was the best of the bowls that weren't in the National Championship rotation, though, during that Bowl Alliance era or whatever it was called.

No it wasn't. The Citrus Bowl always had better matchups than the Peach Bowl, and other bowls did on a yearly basis as well.

The Peach Bowl in the 1990s was just a run-of-the-mill second tier bowl. Nothing special.

Let's compare the Peach to the Citrus bowl in terms of matchups, from 1991 - 1997. It's not even close, the Citrus has better matchups every single year:

1991 Peach: #12 (ECU) vs #21
1991 Citrus: #13 vs #14

1992 Peach: #19 vs unranked
1992 Citrus: #8 vs #15

1993 Peach: #24 vs unranked
1993 Citrus: #6 vs #13

1994 Peach: #16 vs #23
1994 Citrus: #6 vs #13

1995 Peach: #18 vs unranked
1995 Citrus: #4 vs #8

1996 Peach: #17 vs unranked
1996 Citrus: #9 vs #11

1997 Peach: #13 vs unranked
1997 Citrus: #6 vs #11

Would you ECU fans please stop making these unfounded claims? It's embarrassing.

Wow, those pesky things called facts, you know.

(01-06-2016 04:28 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 04:20 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 04:07 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  ECU has 2 Citrus Bowl trophies to its name as well. Either way you wanna do it Quo.

No you don't, you have two Tangerine Bowl wins, over the Mighty Powers UMass and Maine.

The Tangerine Bowl was a 3rd-tier bowl, even lower on the rung than the Peach. Decades later, it was overhauled and upgraded to the Citrus Bowl.

First, ECU fans try to claim a second-tier bowl win in 1992 is now a Major Bowl win, and now you try to claim 3rd-tier bowl wins in the 1960s as equal to a second-tier bowl win.

Amazing what these ECU fans will do to puff up their record.

The Tangerine was simply re-named the Citrus. Its the same bowl. Furthermore, third-tier? There were only NINE bowl games when we played in the Citrus (Tangerine).

No, more money was thrown in and it got better bowl ties.

And it was bottom barrel when ECU played it. Why do you think that neither ECU nor their opponents was ranked? Do you know that the Tangerine Bowl of the 1960s featured mighty powers like Coast Guard, West Chester, Lamar, Morgan State, Tennessee Tech, Richmond, and Presbyterian? All unranked?

One question: WHO CARES whether it was major or not at the time? It's major now and we all know the NCAA uses revisionist history.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(01-06-2016 07:44 AM)pablowow Wrote:  

(01-06-2016 05:46 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(01-04-2016 04:09 PM)GreenWave16 Wrote:  Looks like The Green Wave are not slacking in the prestige department, you're welcome AAC.

going to BCS bowls in 1890 and 1903 don't count for 'prestige'.

also...

-84 rep points? You aren't doing it right skippy.

How about our lifetime record against you. We have it both ways. Bearcat#1. Also have it in the classroom and at the AAU table. Oh and savacool owns you at your own game. It's quite amusing to see you walk into it all of the time. Especially when you try to be the most clever troll at the wine and cheese party.

1. Speak English (I bet you didn't go to Tulane. If you did, then LOL).
2. None of what you said changes my statement: That Tulane's major bowls were before the invention of fire. So to beat one's chest about it is funny and sad...and funny.


This whole thread: LOL -A lame attempt at relevancy for a conference that is 100% G5 despite some of you guys and your very best efforts to act like we are anything but.


Here is a tip for you and a guide: Just when you start to get brainwashed by the homers in this forum and think the AAC is a power conference in any stretch of the imagination just stop and recall our CRUD per team payout from TV, our CRUD bowl lineups, and for good measure, our PUTRID bowl record this year. If you do this it will bring you back to reality.