Welcome Guest! Create an Account login email: password: remember me: BASKETBALL Latest News News Archive Schedule/Results Multi-Media Recruiting FOOTBALL Latest News News Archive Schedule/Results Multi-Media Recruiting MESSAGE BOARD Message Home - Ohio Basketball - Ohio Basketball Recruiting - The O Zone - Ohio Football - Ohio Football Recruiting - Ohio Volleyball - Ohio Baseball - Ohio Olympic Sports... - General OU Discussion... - Website Feedback... - Posting Policy Edit My Profile Private Messages Logout CHAT LINKS site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp Message Board BobcatAttack.com Message Board Ohio Football Topic:  Bowl Eligibility Topic:  Bowl Eligibility Author Message rpbobcat General User Member Since: 4/28/2006 Location: Rochelle Park, NJ Post Count: 3,576 Status: Offline     Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 6/30/2016 6:33:15 AM  According to today's The Record, the NCAA has now ruled that all bowl eligible FBS teams,with at least a 6-6 record, must be invited to a bowl,before any 5-7 teams can be invited. Back to Top 71 BOBCAT General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Post Count: 1,892 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 6/30/2016 9:13:41 AM  WOW this is good news for the MAC. Back to Top OU_Country General User Member Since: 12/6/2005 Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County Post Count: 8,351 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 6/30/2016 2:09:12 PM  Too bad they won't say "bowl eligible" means 7 wins. Back to Top GoCats105 General User Member Since: 1/31/2006 Location: Seattle, WA Post Count: 7,215 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 6/30/2016 2:49:23 PM  OU_Country wrote: Too bad they won't say "bowl eligible" means 7 wins. Or eight. Back to Top Alan Swank General User Member Since: 12/11/2004 Location: Athens, OH Post Count: 7,120 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 6/30/2016 4:44:19 PM  GoCats105 wrote: OU_Country wrote: Too bad they won't say "bowl eligible" means 7 wins. Or eight. It's a shame that "bowl eligible" for conferences like the MAC has become the standard for success. Back to Top Bcat2 General User Member Since: 7/6/2010 Post Count: 4,295 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 6/30/2016 6:34:37 PM  Alan Swank wrote: GoCats105 wrote: OU_Country wrote: Too bad they won't say "bowl eligible" means 7 wins. Or eight. It's a shame that "bowl eligible" for conferences like the MAC has become the standard for success. One moment. The above seems to settle on a single/sole standard for "success."We know Monroe has a single/sole standard for "success." I would contend that "success" should include winning with student athletes, contending with student athletes, graduating student athletes, representing well with student athletes and in this time brand development. My perspective is "success" is bigger than a MACC or a Bowl season. I would argue that Ohio has been more successful than Miami, Buffalo or Akron who have won the MACC. Again success needs to be far bigger than "the" MAC or some bowl. "Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men." JFK Back to Top Monroe Slavin General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Oxnard, CA Post Count: 9,121 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 6/30/2016 7:06:33 PM  Bcat2 wrote: Alan Swank wrote: GoCats105 wrote: OU_Country wrote: Too bad they won't say "bowl eligible" means 7 wins. Or eight. It's a shame that "bowl eligible" for conferences like the MAC has become the standard for success. One moment. The above seems to settle on a single/sole standard for "success."We know Monroe has a single/sole standard for "success." I would contend that "success" should include winning with student athletes, contending with student athletes, graduating student athletes, representing well with student athletes and in this time brand development. My perspective is "success" is bigger than a MACC or a Bowl season. I would argue that Ohio has been more successful than Miami, Buffalo or Akron who have won the MACC. Again success needs to be far bigger than "the" MAC or some bowl. Stop accepting as high achievement items which are minimal standards. I acknowledge that Solich has done well on those counts..have never denied that. But it's more that not meeting those marks would be a real disappointment than that meeting those marks should be held up for high praise. For the money being paid the staff and invested in the program and the lightweight schedule we play each year, not so good. Where's the band?! WHERE"S THE BAND?! DesignspiritUSA.com The Pets On The Go Collection of pet gear travel bags The Holiday Tote Bigg Bagg Collection--over-sized, reversible, extra pockets; now love carrying packages as much as you love shopping! Back to Top rpbobcat General User Member Since: 4/28/2006 Location: Rochelle Park, NJ Post Count: 3,576 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 7/1/2016 6:33:34 AM  Getting back to my original post. One can argue whether 6-6 is somehow an acceptance of "mediocrity" for bowl participation. But at least it assures that teams that do have a 6-6 record can't be denied a bowl because of conference tie-ins or because a 5-7 team may be more desirable to a bowl committee. Back to Top OU_Country General User Member Since: 12/6/2005 Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County Post Count: 8,351 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 7/1/2016 9:40:51 AM  rpbobcat wrote: Getting back to my original post. One can argue whether 6-6 is somehow an acceptance of "mediocrity" for bowl participation. But at least it assures that teams that do have a 6-6 record can't be denied a bowl because of conference tie-ins or because a 5-7 team may be more desirable to a bowl committee. I'm in agreement with your point of view on this. I just don't enjoy the "bowl season", and feel like 7-5 should be the minimum standard. I'm also in agreement that we can all have different opinions of success. Lastly, in my own personal opinion, miracle years of 12-0 or 11-1 aside, the greatest single season achievement any Ohio Bobcat football team can have is to get to, and win the last MAC game of the year in Detroit. No (insert sponsor.com) bowl game win will mean as much to me as a fan or Alumni. Back to Top Alan Swank General User Member Since: 12/11/2004 Location: Athens, OH Post Count: 7,120 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 7/2/2016 12:41:18 PM  Bcat2 wrote: Alan Swank wrote: GoCats105 wrote: OU_Country wrote: Too bad they won't say "bowl eligible" means 7 wins. Or eight. It's a shame that "bowl eligible" for conferences like the MAC has become the standard for success. One moment. The above seems to settle on a single/sole standard for "success."We know Monroe has a single/sole standard for "success." I would contend that "success" should include winning with student athletes, contending with student athletes, graduating student athletes, representing well with student athletes and in this time brand development. My perspective is "success" is bigger than a MACC or a Bowl season. I would argue that Ohio has been more successful than Miami, Buffalo or Akron who have won the MACC. Again success needs to be far bigger than "the" MAC or some bowl. Hardly three teams that I would even want to be compared to. Making a bowl game is no longer a big deal by any standard. Back to Top colobobcat66 General User Member Since: 9/1/2006 Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO Post Count: 4,475 Status: Online     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 7/3/2016 8:56:34 AM  Alan Swank wrote: Bcat2 wrote: Alan Swank wrote: GoCats105 wrote: OU_Country wrote: Too bad they won't say "bowl eligible" means 7 wins. Or eight. It's a shame that "bowl eligible" for conferences like the MAC has become the standard for success. One moment. The above seems to settle on a single/sole standard for "success."We know Monroe has a single/sole standard for "success." I would contend that "success" should include winning with student athletes, contending with student athletes, graduating student athletes, representing well with student athletes and in this time brand development. My perspective is "success" is bigger than a MACC or a Bowl season. I would argue that Ohio has been more successful than Miami, Buffalo or Akron who have won the MACC. Again success needs to be far bigger than "the" MAC or some bowl. Hardly three teams that I would even want to be compared to. Making a bowl game is no longer a big deal by any standard. But when you say that the MACC is the only sign of success, then that's who you are being compared to. They are sucessful, we are not, some say. Back to Top Alan Swank General User Member Since: 12/11/2004 Location: Athens, OH Post Count: 7,120 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 7/3/2016 11:53:49 AM  colobobcat66 wrote: Alan Swank wrote: Bcat2 wrote: Alan Swank wrote: GoCats105 wrote: OU_Country wrote: Too bad they won't say "bowl eligible" means 7 wins. Or eight. It's a shame that "bowl eligible" for conferences like the MAC has become the standard for success. One moment. The above seems to settle on a single/sole standard for "success."We know Monroe has a single/sole standard for "success." I would contend that "success" should include winning with student athletes, contending with student athletes, graduating student athletes, representing well with student athletes and in this time brand development. My perspective is "success" is bigger than a MACC or a Bowl season. I would argue that Ohio has been more successful than Miami, Buffalo or Akron who have won the MACC. Again success needs to be far bigger than "the" MAC or some bowl. Hardly three teams that I would even want to be compared to. Making a bowl game is no longer a big deal by any standard. But when you say that the MACC is the only sign of success, then that's who you are being compared to. They are sucessful, we are not, some say. Monroe may have said that but I never did. As you pointed out, there are many measures of success. My only point that when more than half the teams make a bowl, it really isn't a big deal any more. Back to Top Monroe Slavin General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Oxnard, CA Post Count: 9,121 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 7/3/2016 5:16:31 PM  I've never said MACC is the only standard. But I hold in minimum high regard anyone who thinks it's other than the far and away first goal. Where's the band?! WHERE"S THE BAND?! DesignspiritUSA.com The Pets On The Go Collection of pet gear travel bags The Holiday Tote Bigg Bagg Collection--over-sized, reversible, extra pockets; now love carrying packages as much as you love shopping! Back to Top Alan Swank General User Member Since: 12/11/2004 Location: Athens, OH Post Count: 7,120 Status: Offline     RE: Bowl Eligibility    Posted: 7/3/2016 6:33:55 PM  Monroe Slavin wrote: I've never said MACC is the only standard. But I hold in minimum high regard anyone who thinks it's other than the far and away first goal. Fair enough - that's why I used the words "may have said." Agreed on your second sentence. Back to Top Showing Replies:   1 - 14  of 14 Posts Jump to Page:   1 View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               WHO'S ONLINE There are 148 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com 146 Guests 2 Registered Users:   Bobcat Tattoo, colobobcat66 There are no other users looking at this page.

Copyright ©2025 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties