(12-07-2016 07:31 PM)TheRevSWT Wrote:  

(12-07-2016 07:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  And how do propose to earn it if all youre going to get even if you finish 9-3 is a trip to two bowls you have to fly to? Seriously, you have great fans and a great stadium...but you're not bringing 5k to Tucson (even for your first bowl).

I think you're stuck in the past. Sorry if that sounds harsh. I get it. USA was picked at 6-6 over Texas State at 7-5 one year for a bowl. Texas State stayed home as a result. USA beat Texas State that year and had the same number of FBS wins and the same conference record. I see your anger. You keep referring, obliquely, to it. That dynamic is gone now (not enough bowls). But a new dynamic, where you are even in a more disadvantageous position, is developing. And this time, unlike back then, there's an easy solution. Either way, your AD should be able to see it (although some of y'all seem to have a pretty low opinion of him).

The proposals I've seen take some (but not all) of the BS out of the process and open up more and better opportunities to Texas State if they earn them. The ULL method.....you're stuck in a lower tier in the Belt even if you win the conference.

Its so bad now that the two conference champions were originally picked behind the 3rd, 5th, and EIGHTH place finishers. And for the record, I doubt that any metric developed would have put USA anywhere but Tucson this year. I'm fine with that. Just ensure that we have reasonably equal access to our better bowls when we perform better. That's all. And it would certainly help Texas State.

You can't fix the past, only the future.

You don't think we can bring 5k? We'll gladly prove you wrong when we do.

You think I'm stuck in the past? I say you're acting like a child because you have to go to a far away bowl.

You say you aren't upset about it, but the whole crux of your argument is "It's unfair that we won't get picked for a bowl because there's a better option out there for them."

I've long taken the stance that what isn't given to me I will take. I have the same stance with the bowl games. But you, it seems, can't stand that notion.

And you keep on trying to make this about me vs. USA. It's not. If I wanted to, I would say stAte screwed us over, because we beat them and (I believe) we had the same record. But I'm not. I use that year as an example of how you sat silently by when it happened to another team. So when you try to play that you are championing for everyone, it just rings... well absolutely stupid.

I just find it absolutely mind-boggling that you want to tell a bowl "yeah, I know it's financially better for you and it will draw more attraction... But screw you.. USA wants to go there this year."

You keep bringing up 2014. There wasn't a solution that could be legislated. We had the same record in conference. We beat you. You had one more win, but it was an FCS team.

But even then, had there been a protocol, you wouldn't have to worry about getting hosed. You would presumably know what the result would be

----

No one is in the Sun Belt Conference to simply make money... If were about that, we'd just fold up all of our athletic teams....because all of us lose money on them. Lets not pretend ULL is the only team that could bring fans to that bowl. BTW, that's probably the best bowl for you guys for attendance too. Guess what....you can never go to it. Win the conference? Sorry ULL got to 6 wins.

---

If you think that its a good idea for the Conference to allow a situation, as exists now, where the two first place finishing teams get chosen fourth and fifth for bowls ...then that's on you. Because that is going to hurt you guys when you sort it out and compete for bowls again.

This doesn't get fixed, and you'll just have someone else to bring up a gripe WHEN (not if) it bites Texas State in the rear the next time you get bowl eligible.

BTW, you're never going to the NO Bowl if they don't fix the system. They'll pick someone closer if ULL isn't available.