PonyFans.com

Posted on Wed, Dec. 03, 2003



TCU gets lesson in bowls' justice

Gil Lebreton - In My Opinion


In the end, there were no deals. No winks. No Sopranos-style favors for the good of the family.

The family, to be honest, wasn't much help at all.

Barely an hour after he had heard the news Monday night, TCU football coach Gary Patterson was asked if a trip to the PlainsCapital Fort Worth Bowl was a just reward for a football team that had gone 11-1 and made national headlines with its Cinderella BCS bid.

"No," Patterson answered, instinctively. "But it depends on what you define as a just reward.

"Is it a just reward when a 6-6 team from a BCS conference goes to a bowl game on New Year's Day?"

No, but it happens. It happens because the bowls -- remember? -- are "good for college football" and have been "so good to the schools" for lo these many years. That's what the bowl directors and head coaches always say, at least.

Somebody scratches the right back. Somebody makes the right promise. And in the end, all of the coaches, players, athletic directors and alums end up in just the right New Year's places, wearing the right sunscreen.

In other words, surf's up, Frogs. See you at the Fort Worth Bowl.

The sacred, time-honored bowl system did not work for the 11-1 Frogs this past week.

Oh, they're happy, happy that some bowl was willing to ignore the politics and invite the team with the best football record in Texas.

And TCU administrators are grateful, grateful that common sense eventually prevailed over petty jealousy.

But the system failed. Instead of being accommodating to TCU for all the positive national publicity that it brought Conference USA this season, its small-minded league brethren tried to give the Frogs something to remember them by.

The questions linger:

Q. Why did TCU wait so long to tell someone about the conflict with its semester exam schedule?

A. It didn't. As early as mid-November, athletic director Eric Hyman informed C-USA commissioner Britton Banowsky of the possible exam conflict. Banowsky said that he, in turn, informed GMAC Mobile Bowl president Jerry Silverstein. Patterson told at least one reporter about the impending exam problem during the week of the Cincinnati game (Nov. 15).

Q. Why, then, did Silverstein and his selection chairman, Murray Cape, go to Dallas last weekend and invite TCU?

A. A good question. A media member in Mobile on Tuesday described Silverstein as "arrogant" and having "a chip on his shoulder" about playing second fiddle in his town to the Senior Bowl.

Silverstein may have been merely guilty of trying to put together his best game. But at some point, there was talk that the Mobile Bowl might sue TCU for breaking the conference contract. That's when TCU officials pointed out that the Mobile people were already in breach of contract for not scheduling the game between Dec. 20 and 31.

Q. Why didn't the Mobile Bowl people accept TCU's compromise to accept the bid and not arrive until the day before the game?

A. Who knows? The bowl people were insistent, though, that both teams be there to hear Pete Rose speak on Dec. 16.

Q. Why didn't the conference office take charge sooner and assign Memphis or Louisville to the Mobile game?

A. Because the petty ADs from other C-USA schools wanted to stab the Frogs in the back. If you want names, try Dave Maggard of the University of Houston.

Maggard's Cougars had embarrassing attendance, lost five games, and yet bullied their way past TCU in the bowl pecking order to take the bid to the Sheraton Hawaii Bowl. Of course, Maggard didn't seem to believe TCU's story about exam conflicts. We'd expect that coming from Cougar High.

Q. How close did TCU come to not getting any bowl bid at all?

A. Close enough. If Banowsky, in the end, had failed to convince the Mobile Bowl people to take Louisville, the Cardinals would have come to Fort Worth and left TCU hanging.

The Frogs, however, had already been approached by a bowl without C-USA ties and told that they would be invited to that game, assuming there were no BCS complications. It appears that game was the Houston Bowl.

Q. Was this whole thing really about TCU and ESPN working to make sure that the Frogs played in Fort Worth?

A. That's probably what Maggard and some of the other ADs thought. Hyman insists that it's simply not true.

Besides, if ESPN wanted it, ESPN would have just said it and done it, right?

Q. Why didn't the conference help the Frogs more, after the 11-1 season and all the positive publicity that TCU brought the league this season?

A. Because the ADs apparently are upset about rumors that TCU soon will be leaving Conference USA.

Alas, what goes around comes around. The single victory roundly credited with propelling TCU's six-year run of success is the 1998 Sun Bowl upset over Southern Cal.

TCU had finished 6-5 in that regular season, tied for fifth place in the Western Athletic Conference's Mountain Division. Yet, the Frogs were picked for the El Paso bowl game over Wyoming (8-3), Colorado State (8-4) and Utah (7-4).

Why? Sun Bowl officials freely admitted that it was because all three of those schools were leaving the WAC, and it was a WAC bowl.

TCU has been to a bowl game every year since.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gil LeBreton, (817) 390-7760 [email protected]





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2003 Star Telegram and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.dfw.com

I have a question for this foo' and ANY OTHER FROGS ON AROUND... please tell us unenlightened Mustangs EXACTLY what it is that you all WANTED from CUSA and the Bowls. You didn't win CUSA so the liberty bowl is out. You turned down Mobile - all that was left was Ft. Worth and Hawaii - if playing in Hawaii was THAT big of a deal for you - just schedule them. UH is the perfect team for Hawaii - since their fans don't travel well anyway.

Yes, poor, poor TCU! They just won eleven games more than SMU did, are going to a Bowl, have great prospects for next year, haven't fired any assistant coaches, etc, etc. Poor, poor TCU!

Yes, poor, poor TCU! They just won eleven games more than SMU did, are going to a Bowl, have great prospects for next year, haven't fired any assistant coaches, etc, etc. Poor, poor TCU!

Hey geno, The Bitter phones ringing......Oh It's for you!!!

<img src="http://humwww.ucsc.edu/wst/images/phone.jpg" alt=" - " />

And quit posting twice, you moron! Jeez, I know you're busy what with finals coming up and everything, but you think you'd take the time to learn how to work a message board!

The Spaz

<small>[ 12-03-2003, 08:02 AM: Message edited by: Spaz ]</small>

Originally posted by geno:
Yes, poor, poor TCU! They just won eleven games more than SMU did, are going to a Bowl, have great prospects for next year, haven't fired any assistant coaches, etc, etc. Poor, poor TCU!

quit taking jibba jabba and answer the question sucka... Why does TCU feel like it has been wronged in this deal?

TCU wasn't wronged in where we ended up. The harm was done in the way the conference and the bowl handled it. TCU let the conference know weeks in advance that there would be a problem. If you believe CUSA, then the GMAC Bowl was told weeks in advance that TCU couldn't go. If you believe the GMAC Bowl, then CUSA never bothered to let the bowl know. TCU is contractually obligated not to talk to the GMAC Bowl directly. The GMAC's contract states that the game was to be played after Dec. 20. CUSA never bothered to enforce this, and then when it became a problem, they did nothing about it. CUSA only got involved when their lawyers informed them that TCU was right, and the bowl was wrong. Bowls make deals every year, how do you think Boise St. ended up in Ft. Worth? They didn't want to go to the same bowl again, so a deal was made for Tulsa to go to Boise. This could have all been handled easily by the GMAC Bowl and by the conference. Instead, the GMAC Bowl tries to force TCU into the bowl using the media. TCU even agreed to come to the bowl as long as they could arrive on Dec. 17th, which would allow the university to only reschedule a couple of days of finals, not the entire week. The GMAC insisted on TCU being there on Dec. 13 so they could attend some meaningless bowl events. This should have all been handled easily and quietly. Instead, it was blown out of proportion.

Originally posted by Frog81:
TCU wasn't wronged in where we ended up. The harm was done in the way the conference and the bowl handled it. TCU let the conference know weeks in advance that there would be a problem. If you believe CUSA, then the GMAC Bowl was told weeks in advance that TCU couldn't go. If you believe the GMAC Bowl, then CUSA never bothered to let the bowl know. TCU is contractually obligated not to talk to the GMAC Bowl directly. The GMAC's contract states that the game was to be played after Dec. 20. CUSA never bothered to enforce this, and then when it became a problem, they did nothing about it. CUSA only got involved when their lawyers informed them that TCU was right, and the bowl was wrong.

Instead, the GMAC Bowl tries to force TCU into the bowl using the media.

Sounds to me like the bowls were the real problem in all this - not the conference (as the Ft. Worth paper would suggest). The Houston paper has been significantly more objective about this whole issue. No one outside of Ft. Worth ever doubted that tcu would go to a bowl game (unlike the star-telegram articles suggests)and...The toad reporter neglected to mention that none of the bowls really wanted UH, so by GMAC forcing tcu's hand - UH was going to get squeezed and the conference would have ONE LESS bowl representative. Come on purple foo's - break from the "editorial" and join your H-town brothers and sisters and admit that no real harm has been done (cerainly not TWO DAYS OF ARTICLES WORTH) and CUSA needed to balance the interests of all its members - not just tcu's!

thank you and good night !

We can all agree that, in general, successful non-BCS schools get screwed relative BCS schools. But to suggest that TCU got screwed by going to the Fort Worth Bowl just shows the completely delusional attitude running amok over in amphibian land. And if you believe that what the frogs really wanted was to go to Hawaii rather than play a home game, and that they would decline a bowl they felt they deserved because it's during finals, then I'm sure Hyman can sell you a nice bridge over the San Francisco Bay, where the frogs will be playing any MWC bowl games in the future.

Miami is 11-1. It's only loss to Iowa, and quality wins over #20 Bowling Green (perhaps also as #23), Colorado State, and Marshall. Average margin of victory 28.

Boise State is 11-1. It's only loss (by 2)to Oregon State, and wins over 2 teams from the conference the frogs are so anxious to join. Average margin of victory 31 (and margin beat one of the two worst teams in the country, SMU, by 42).

TCU at 11-1. Loss (by 12) to Southern Miss (from the conference that they are too good for). Wins over Navy, Louisville, and Houston (though they allowed "Cougar High" --term actually used in the the above column-- to put up 55(!) on their [deleted]). Average margin of victory about 11 (including big 27-point win over one of two worst teams in the country, Army, and late 7-point win over the other).

So we'll just see whose too good for the WAC, ConfUSA, and the Fort Worth Bowl on Dec. 23 and thereafter.

Originally posted by DiamondM:
We can all agree that, in general, successful non-BCS schools get screwed relative BCS schools. But to suggest that TCU got screwed by going to the Fort Worth Bowl just shows the completely delusional attitude running amok over in amphibian land.

Well Mr. M... the toads suckas who know Mr. T and don't live in Ft. Worth probably would agree with you... in fact some have express secret disgust with the whole situation themselves (not placing the blame on anyone).

I have figuered out that it is these web board posters and columnists - that do not have to actaully engage in any point-counter-point discussion that are trying to sell they have somehow been wronged

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031203/ap_on_sc/twain_s_frog_5

if they really wanted to find the jumping frog... they could have looked at the tcu athletic department (jumping bowls... jumping conferences...)

<small>[ 12-03-2003, 10:56 AM: Message edited by: MizterTea ]</small>

Originally posted by MizterTea:
Well Mr. M...

Um... I believe that is Ms. M.

Mr. T,

I don't think LeBreton's article was saying that TCU got screwed by ending up in the FW Bowl. It was just an article about how there was a group of people from Mobile and apparently a few AD's who were trying to stick it to TCU.

I think TCU is going to the best possible place for them this year against a great opponent...unfortunately, we got some terrible press as the Mobile people tried to make themselves out to be the poor bowl...when in fact they were trying to bully TCU into coming to their bowl on their terms. I don't think any school would put up with that.

<small>[ 12-03-2003, 11:34 AM: Message edited by: Froggy Style ]</small>

There are those out there who suggest that TCU bypassed the GMAC Bowl for fear that they might meat Miami of Ohio and get beat by a good-but-fairly-anonymous team. If that's the case, for shame. Boise State undoubtedly could have wrangled another bid to the Humanitarian Bowl (which of course is played on BSU's home field) but took a chance to come to FW to play a talented (albeit overhyped), ranked opponent. If Boise State wins the game, TCU will look even more foolish than it already does.

Hey, Higher Authority, you have an SMU degree? You say "TCU might MEAT Miami...?" Freshman English was a challenge, wasn't it?