We did you a favor. You didn't get embarrassed like the rest of us except Ohio.

Well EMU and Toledo games were close at least.

(12-23-2018 07:30 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  Well EMU and Toledo games were close at least.

Two plays and the MAC would have been 3-3...
EMU with the failure to stop the 4th and long play. That was their game to win...
Toledo, with the same deal vs FIU( though a VERY FAVORABLE spot gave FIU the first down). Toledo would have had close to 3 minutes to go 60 yards for the possible win or at least tie it...

(12-23-2018 01:49 AM)huskie1stdown Wrote:  We did you a favor. You didn't get embarrassed like the rest of us except Ohio.

Miami doesn't usually get outright embarrassed by other G5 teams under Martin, we just keep it close and usually blow it. We played well enough against the Army option that I think we'd be close with Georgia Southern, I'm not sure about the others.

As I stated at the start of this thread, Miami was more deserving of going to a bowl game than Eastern, Western, and possible Toledo. We were playing very well at the end of the year and were enthused and had some momentum going. When strength of schedule is so different as it was this year, number of wins is a stupid way to pick the bowl teams. Pretty sure Miami would have won, or at leaat lost a close game, not just an embarassing ass whipping like Western took. The Broncos just were not the same after they lost their QB and did not belong in that bowl game. I know last year Miami lost Ragland for 4 or 5 games and our backup QB just gave away a couple of wins vs Kent and BG which caused us to go 5-7 instead of 7-5, plus who knows we might have won a couple of others with him. So not having your star QB is huge. I am in Vegas for a month, and it is embarassing to hear many of the comments about the performances of WM and NIU, in particular, and the MAC as a whole. Reputation of the conference is getting drug through the mud. Send your best teams.

Quote:We did you a favor. You didn't get embarrassed like the rest of us except Ohio.

Only 2 teams got embarrassed (whipped): NIU & WMU. The other 4 didn't. 1 Win, 2 close losses, and a 4th Q loss.

Quote:Miami doesn't usually get outright embarrassed by other G5 teams under Martin

I won't count losing to E. Illinois & getting stomped by Akron in 2016, as you guys started out 0-6, ended up 6-6, and barely lost to Miss St in a bowl. And yes, Miami-OH this year was better in the 2nd half of the season, too. Maybe it's a Martin-thing, I dunno. They did get whipped on the scoreboard 21-0 by Cinci, and also by 6-6 Minn 26-3, who wouldn't be 6-6 if not for correctly firing their DC near end of season and winning their last 2 games in surprising fashion.

I can give Miami full confidence that they too wouldn't have been stomped in those 3 non-stomp losses, if playing them instead -- including of course the game against faltering SD State in which Ohio won. But I can't give the benefit of the doubt that they wouldn't in any way be solidly beaten by the #1 & #2 teams the MAC faced and got Whipped by: Conf-USA Champ UAB + BYU. At best, one could make the argument that since Miami was having a better 2nd-half, that they would have at least boded more well in those 2 games. Which, yes, is easier to say playing Monday-Morning QB. :)

Quote:Miami was more deserving of going to a bowl game than Eastern, Western, and possible Toledo. We were playing very well at the end of the year and were enthused and had some momentum going.

That doesn't matter, though. One could pick P5 5-7 teams by that rationale to go, instead of a 6-6 G5 (or even 6-6 P5). That's playing catch-up.

Fact is, if you're 6-6, you're not going to be chosen over a team who's instead got a winning record (7-5), in your conference who you didn't beat. You didn't beat WMU, they who also beat the MAC Champs, beat you at home, and had a winning record, and you guys didn't. End of story.

It was a written rule that 6-6 teams had to wait on 7-5 teams to get into bowls -- but turning P5 conf-affiliations into at-larges for 7-5 G5s killed that idea for $$ and $$ alone between different conference. Otherwise it would have definitely stayed, and for good reason.

It's an unwritten rule that by default, they're going to choose a winning team over a .500 team from the conference. You're going to need a lot better than "improved to reach .500" when you're just a lowly G5 team -- over a winning team from your conference you never played or did in fact Lose To.

If you beat WMU, but, say, lost to NIU -- and WMU beat Ball State instead of doing something stupid at the end of their OT game -- where we'd still be at 6-6 vs 7-5, then I think you may have a case worth hearing because you beat them. Until then, being chosen at 6-6 above a fellow conference non-div winner who's 7-5 -- you're not getting chosen over any one of them unless you have a win on them.

If VA-Tech would have LOST to Marshall, opening up a spot, Miami would THEN have a true gripe about not getting in. Even over 6-5 Southern Miss. S-Miss missed out on a game, but being over .500 is due to beating an FCS team. So they only had 5 FBS wins, and Miami had 6. The other, a Sun-Belt 6-6 team who also only had 5 FBS wins, should and I'm sure as hell WOULD get trumped by Miami-OH too, and rightfully so.