Sky is falling alert

by **SMU_is_bowling** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 1:58 pm

Sorry, I was thinking Blog was saying there were some 5 win teams that were eligible . . . long weekend, the head is still not on right!

there are way too many bowls now!!! kinda crazy, but good for SMU i guess

by **SMU Football Blog** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 pm

No, my point is there were seven win teams that didn't go to bowls: La. Tech; Miami (OH), Western Michigan.

by **EastStang** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:06 pm

The MAC, and WAC have fewer bowl tie-ins.

by **SMU Football Blog** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:09 pm

EastStang wrote:The MAC, and WAC have fewer bowl tie-ins.

For purposes of this discussion, we are talking about getting into a bowl with six wins. Obviously, at that point, we are talking at large bids.

by **jtstang** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:21 pm

This team better just focus on UAB and Houston and Tulsa and Rice and let the bowl chips fall where they may. I have no expectations of SMU winning any of those games.

by **SMU_is_bowling** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:36 pm

This whole web site is for speculation . . . none of us know what will happen for sure. But the "what if"'s are flying around so might as well take this thread and run with it.

That would [deleted] me off to win 7 games and not get to go to a bowl game (La. Tech, Miami (Oh), w. mich).

by **abezontar** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:44 pm

Corso wrote:I realize there's a difference of opinion, but I still maintain that some bowl will extend a bid to us at 6-6 just for the media attention. Hopefully we win three of the next four, making the argument moot.

Just like they extended a bowl invitation to us at 6-5?

Sky is falling alert

Who is online