| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 404.1 | Blockhead Bowl more like it if Clemson goes | SHALOT::MEDVID | Dump Jesse Helms | Thu Nov 01 1990 13:17 | 5 |
| What is the Blockbuster Bowl? Did I miss something during the
off-season? Is this one of those old bowls that has now taken
Blockbuster Video as its name and sponsor?
--dan'l
|
| 404.2 | | SHALOT::MEDVID | Dump Jesse Helms | Thu Nov 01 1990 13:19 | 1 |
| And what the hell is LSU doing in the bowl picture?
|
| 404.3 | Wow, they've got 4 guys running a pattern | 21250::GYOUNG | Dancin' at the Zombie Zoo | Thu Nov 01 1990 13:52 | 5 |
| Poor Nebraska ..... they get to play against a team that actually
passes the ball ...... they'll lose by 3 touchdowns.
Greg
|
| 404.4 | unkown, maybe | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Thu Nov 01 1990 14:56 | 10 |
| re: Blockbuster.
Who knows? No other ownership is ascribed.
re: LSU.
I think the Independence Bowl is played in Shreveport. Right/Wrong? If
so, that would explain LSU. Southern Miss might make it.
TTom
|
| 404.5 | USA Today, has got to be crazy!!! | RAVEN1::M_PHILLIPS | Flirting With Disaster | Fri Nov 02 1990 02:17 | 1 |
|
|
| 404.6 | CU-ND rematch in the Orange Bowl? | CURIE::CHUANG | What's so Funny 'Bout Peace, Love & U | Mon Nov 05 1990 15:15 | 11 |
|
Does somebody have an update on what the Bowl games will look
like after the happenings of the past weekend? I think my
prediction of a Colorado-Notre Dame rematch in the Orange Bowl
is a real possibility now....Any other ideas on some of the
other bowls....
Thanks,
Peace/ed
|
| 404.7 | conference leaders | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Nov 05 1990 15:30 | 23 |
| Conference leaders (and bowls):
ACC (Citrus) Georgia Tech
Big 8 (Orange) Colorado
Big 10 (Rose) Iowa
Pac 10 (Rose) Washington
SEC (Sugar) Mississippi, Florida (ineligible)
SWC (Cotton) Houston (ineligible), Texas
WAC (Holiday) BYU
Big West (California) San Jose St
Mid-American (California) Toledo
Independents:
Notre Dame, 7-1
Louisville, 8-1-1
Florida St, 6-2
Miami-FL, 6-2
Penn St, 6-2
Citrus, Orange, Sugar and Cotton has one school locked in by conference
and one school invited.
TTom
|
| 404.8 | Clemson to Hall o Fame? | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Tue Nov 06 1990 13:20 | 9 |
| Clemson is rumored to be headed to the Hall of Fame bowl that's played in
Tampa on Jan 1. Supposedly the sponsors are trying to get a Big 10 team,
maybe Michigan.
BTW, the Blockbuster Bowl is a new bowl that is played in Joe Robbie
Stadium. They also wanted Clemson, who turned them down because of the
date and national TV.
TTom
|
| 404.9 | | 5950::BRAKE | A Question of Balance | Tue Nov 06 1990 16:32 | 5 |
| Who does Mississippi have left on their schedule? Wouldn't it be
amazing to NOT see Auburn, LSU, Tennessee or Alabama in the Sugar Bowl?
Rich
|
| 404.10 | wierder things have happened | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Tue Nov 06 1990 16:45 | 6 |
| Mississippi's remaining schedule:
Nov 17, vs Tennessee
Nov 24, vs Mississippi St at Jackson.
TTom
|
| 404.11 | UT and MSU left | CSC32::J_MANNING | Only Amiga Makes it Possible | Tue Nov 06 1990 16:46 | 5 |
| Ole Miss has Tennessee and Mississippi State left on their conference
schedule. If they can manage to pull off an upset in Memphis next
weekend then they will most likely go to the Sugar Bowl(I can't see
them losing to Miss State...).
|
| 404.12 | early bowls | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Tue Nov 06 1990 16:48 | 8 |
| Some preliminary tentative matchups:
John Hancock - Michigan St vs Southern Cal
Aloha - Arizona vs Syracuse
Freedom - Oregon vs Colorado St/Wyoming
Copper - California vs Wyoming/Colrado St
TTom
|
| 404.13 | Orange & Cotton Matchups | 6984::MACNEAL | Mac's Back in Mass. | Mon Nov 12 1990 11:13 | 5 |
| Some bowl matchups were announced this weekend.
Orange: Notre Dame vs. Colorado
Cotton: Miami vs. SWC Winner (Texas has inside track after beating
Houston)
|
| 404.14 | Virginia to Sugar | 33945::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Nov 12 1990 11:33 | 4 |
| Virginia vs SEC Champ in Sugar Bowl.
Washington, who lost vs Iowa, who lost, maybe, in the RO$E Bowl.
TTom
|
| 404.15 | Granddaddy is dead | 34223::MEDVID | try me on, I'm very you | Mon Nov 12 1990 11:50 | 5 |
| Once again, thanks to Washington's choke and Iowa's bad luck, the Rose
Bowl will mean nothing as far as the national championship picture
goes.
--dan'l
|
| 404.16 | Yes, Rose Bowl is dead... | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 12 1990 12:29 | 25 |
|
Surprisingly, Washington was outplayed, and UCLA came very close to
giving them the game. Given the field conditions, I no sooner had
thought to myself that with three minutes remaining and poor punting
the norm, that UCLA should just let the ball bounce on Washington's last
punt, than the guy comes up for it and tries to make a meaningless fair
catch. Terry Donahue's heart must have stopped on that play. (Anyone
seen a less athletic-looking player than UCLA's punter? And UCLA's
long-snapper gave the poor guy a workout...)
Once again, I am having problems interpreting the college rulebook.
Why is a penalty (other than a personal foul) assessed on a touchdown
when if the player hadn't scored the penalty would just have been
declined? On Washington's TD, UCLA was called for interference and
instead of the call being negated (which seems logical, since the
player scored anyway), they were given half the distance to the goal on
the two-point conversion. John H., is this the proper call?
Iowa looked much better than Ohio State, but, alas, two huge plays (the
deflected TD pass at the end of the first half and the blocked punt in
the fourth quarter) did their national title hopes in. I wouldn't have
wanted to be an Iowan come Sunday morning.
glenn
|
| 404.17 | | FSOA::JHENDRY | John Hendry, DTN 292-2170 | Mon Nov 12 1990 13:11 | 8 |
| I have never seen a penalty on a touchdown being assessed on a two
point conversion. I don't think that's the right call. They do assess
penalties on kicking plays (FGs, PATs) on the ensuing kickoff to
prevent the defense from just teeing off and being offside without
anything being called, but I can't imagine why they'd have assessed the
penalty on the two pointer.
John
|
| 404.18 | | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 12 1990 13:17 | 12 |
|
Thanks, John. That was the way I thought it worked, too. Sometimes it
seems like these guys are making the rules up as they go along, and we
all know the coaches and players don't know the rules any better.
Saturday we were informed in one of the games by the announcers that the
rule had changed on over-and-back passing at the line of scrimmage.
There's simply no way that the average fan can keep up with the rules
anymore...
glenn
|
| 404.19 | In college you have an option | SHALOT::MEDVID | try me on, I'm very you | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:39 | 6 |
| In college, you have the option to take the penalty yardage on the
kickoff or on the conversion. If you go for the PAT, you take it on
the kickoff, but if you try for two you're crazy not to move the ball
up half the distance.
--dan'l
|
| 404.20 | Penalty would be waved off completely in NFL (difference?) | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:46 | 14 |
|
> In college, you have the option to take the penalty yardage on the
> kickoff or on the conversion. If you go for the PAT, you take it on
> the kickoff, but if you try for two you're crazy not to move the ball
> up half the distance.
This was the explanation given, but as John also pointed out, I thought
it only applied to kicking plays. I'm pretty sure that on a touchdown
in college (or in the NFL) a non-unsportsmanlike penalty like off-sides or
something is simply waved off. If this isn't the case in college, it's
definitely a difference in the rules between college and pro.
glenn
|
| 404.21 | KickOff Classic Winner = Sugar Bowl Bid | AKOAGS::GYOUNG | Dancin' at the Zombie Zoo | Mon Nov 12 1990 14:51 | 7 |
| This alleged "signing up" of teams prior to the end of the season is
absurd ..... there are too many variables to consider the ND/Colo.
match (i.e. ND could have 3 losses); why can't we wait until the
end of November to make the calls.
Greg
|
| 404.22 | Why wait ??? Beat the rush. | SHALOT::HUNT | A Prom Nightmare On Helms Street | Mon Nov 12 1990 15:03 | 5 |
| Yeah, if they do away with the date that Bowl bids can "officially" be
offered, you'll have a dozen Bowl scouts flocking at the Notre Dame
spring practice intrasquad scrimmage.
Bob Hunt
|
| 404.23 | NCAA: selective "fairness" | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 12 1990 15:11 | 21 |
|
Quote from NCAA assistant director Dave Cawood on early bowl
commitments:
"Any rule is enforceable. It's just that this rule is impractical.
It's a rule that does not benefit either the student athlete or
institution, so we don't enforce it. I'm not sure how viable an
organization we would be if we had 10 or 15 teams on probation each
year because they violated this rule."
Yeah, right. The NCAA feels free to penalize schools for selling
T-shirts for charity or sending a kid home to his grandmother's
funeral, but when the networks and their money speak up, the rules
suddenly aren't practical. I'd dare say that the latter is
compromising the fairness and the enjoyment of the game for the fans
far more than the former. We're going to have the Notre Dames of the
world cutting contingency deals with NBC-only bowls before the
season starts pretty soon...
glenn
|
| 404.24 | for money, for money | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Nov 12 1990 15:34 | 11 |
| The NCAA tolerates the current bowl "rules" because it leads to major
revenue increases, both to the NCAA and to the member institutions. This
way, services are bid for and with the bidding the dollars go up.
My major complaint is a trend common throughout sports which is to
associate the sponsor's name and/or product with the event. "Federal
Express Orange Bowl". To the Rose Bowl's credit, they kept their name, a
gratuitous gesture considering the millions on TV revenue that it
generates.
TTom
|
| 404.25 | Cited as the biggest reason by bowl analysts | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Been there. Done that. | Thu Nov 15 1990 19:35 | 10 |
| >We're going to have the Notre Djames of the
>world cutting contingency deals with NBC-only bowls before the
>season starts pretty soon...
Or we may already have. The Orange Bowl is on NBC, and as much as ND
may have wanted to back out of a CU matchup, you just know the Lords at
NBC wouldn't have looked at that too kindly with the 5-year
precedent-starting contract just over the horizon.
Dan
|
| 404.26 | Pick one and stick with it, Dan... | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Fri Nov 16 1990 10:56 | 12 |
|
> -< Cited as the biggest reason by bowl analysts >-
Can I take this as a replacement then for that Chris Fowler-supplied
"analysis" you offered up just one week ago? The one that had the ND
bowl committee looking at CBS' Cotton or ABC's Sugar? You were sucked
in on that one. I suppose someone from NBC got on the horn and turned
up the heat in the interim, so both your positions are credible...
glenn
|
| 404.27 | be here now | ITASCA::SHAUGHNESSY | Plato,Homer,Voltaire,BobKnight | Fri Nov 16 1990 14:37 | 7 |
| You miss the point, glenn. Dan uses whatever "fact" and "analysis"
that happens to fit his needs of the moment. That these things end
up contradicting one another, and him, is off no concern to Dan, for
he listened to the advice of that acid-dropping old poet Baba Ram Dass,
"be here now."
MrT
|
| 404.28 | I have one position through thick and thin | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Been there. Done that. | Fri Nov 16 1990 14:38 | 15 |
| 404.29 | It's a dangerous business if handled improperly | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Fri Nov 16 1990 15:59 | 42 |
| 404.30 | | UPBEAT::JHARRINGTON | | Fri Nov 16 1990 16:11 | 2 |
|
Any update on what the *Final* bowl picture seems to be??
|
| 404.31 | | CAM::WAY | HWRFC Clydesdale | Fri Nov 16 1990 16:15 | 15 |
| 404.32 | Can't you find a better 'cause' to defend, Glenn | HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER | Been there. Done that. | Fri Nov 16 1990 19:36 | 46 |
| >I only question your judgement in using a report that contained
>sheer speculation of ND's motives as proof of ND's "shamelessness".
I've always liked Chris Fowler's reports and find him quite credible.
If to relay his report in here evokes questions of my judgement, than
question away. Okay, I admit that probably never again will I give
Notre Dame the benefit of the doubt, that I will view them with
cynicism and be skeptical about each of their motives. They've brought
it on themselves, and the Lou Holtz regime is the last straw.
>even if *you* didn't believe it.
Oh, but I did believe it, and still do. Fowler's honest reporting did
not preclude ND going to the Orange Bowl. There is no "wrong" here
that you seem to be grasping for. ND was searching for alternatives:
you assume the motive was a possible loss to Tennessee; pathological
liar Holtz claims he wanted his seniors to go to a new bowl for them; I
think they felt the influence of NBC and they couldn't market a game
against (another) inferior opponent and expect the public to buy it
(which I also think is wrong-headed thinking - the public and pollsters
buy whatever's on TV. TV puts on whatever sells commercials. ND is
best for that. I suspect some at ND know this as well, and I further
suspect that means NBC was a bigger reason.)
>*I* was the one who entered the note
>wondering if Notre Dame would commit only to NBC bowls in the future,
>not you.
It was fairly widely reported in the last 2 weeks or so. Perhaps it
was an original thought for you, but I first read about it elsewhere.
Not that it really matters though. I gave it credence the first I
heard of it.
>I'm not disputing your right to enter anything. Just that you're
>starting to give good, clean, old-fashioned ND-bashing a bad name.
I'm not trying hard enough, then. There's about 1 person willing to
criticize ND for every 10 white knights defending it. It gives them
that feeling of invulnerability, smugness and sanctimony that they
cherish so much. They've got to be made to worry so that they'ed be
too embarrassed to do things like explaining away the NBC contract with
the excuse that ND fans who follow the team on TV shouldn't have their
lives upset by different start times, and other nonsense.
Dan
Dan
|
| 404.33 | Houston does it again | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Mon Nov 19 1990 10:58 | 24 |
|
Speaking of shame or the lack thereof, how 'bout them Houston Cougars?
They ran it up to the tune of 84-21 against 1-AA Eastern Washington,
leaving the starters in till halfway through the fourth quarter,
apparently so Heisman-candidate David Klingler could throw an
NCAA-record 11 touchdown passes. Eastern Washington's coach was
pissed, commenting that "I don't want to get into a [expletive] match
about that, but someday he'll be on the other end of the broom" (not
against E. Wash, obviously). To add insult to injury, one of the
Houston players was quoted as saying "we've had harder practices".
Simply classless. I think it's fair to say that this episode will only
count *against* Klingler's already-slim Heisman chances, as those
vague, subjective qualities like sportsmanship tend to enter into the
voting sometimes.
Hats off to Eastern Washington for actually scoring three touchdowns
against that vaunted Houston defense.
By the way, why do stats amassed against 1-AA competition count in the
official 1-A record book, anyway?
glenn
|
| 404.34 | Cougars vs Brockton High School? | EARRTH::WORRALL | | Mon Nov 19 1990 11:33 | 9 |
| Houston has no class at all. Pardee used to run it up while at Houston
and the new coach is no different. Well Houston always gets there when
they dont play this second rate teams. A few years ago Wash st. killed
them in a bowl game and Texas kicked there but this year. As soon as
they schedule good teams they get crushed. One thing about Colorado
and Notre Dame, they dont avoid tough competition.
Greg
|
| 404.35 | | ROCK::GRONOWSKI | the dream is always the same... | Mon Nov 19 1990 12:02 | 3 |
|
Houston Sips... (see game v.s. UofT... I loved it!)
|
| 404.36 | Penn ST. vs Florida ST. | CRONIC::CLAYBROOK | | Mon Nov 19 1990 12:22 | 17 |
| Houston's coach Jenkins is more of jerk than Pardee, listening to
his comments before the Texas game saying that he has the best team
in the country and then listening to his lame excuses on why he
ran the score up. According to the National Houstons starting Offense
and Defense wern't taken out till the halfway thru the fourth qtr.
The guy is definately a loser. Well to a better subject, all the
sports writers, commentators, noters and even myself, everyone
was making fun of the new Blockbuster bowl and how it was just
another stupid bowl game which it probably is but they have the
last laugh. The blockbuster Bowl will be the best bowl game of
them all. Penn St. vs Florida ST.
Friday December 28th
Should be a great game.
Dan
|
| 404.37 | Penn State in the Sugar | 33509::LAZARUS | David Lazarus @KYO,323-4353 | Mon Nov 19 1990 12:28 | 2 |
| I thought I heard Penn State was considering the Sugar Bowl.
|
| 404.38 | Hopefully, what goes around comes around | WORDY::NAZZARO | Best advice: Hire a better lawyer! | Tue Nov 20 1990 14:50 | 8 |
| The most amazing (and disgusting) quote I heard from Jenkins
was: "David (Klingler) deserved to get in his reps."
Unbelievable - getting in his "reps" included throwing 11
touchdown passes?!?!?!? Please God, if there is justice,
you will allow Rice or TCU to demolish Houston nexted season.
NAZZ
|
| 404.39 | | MAXWEL::MACNEAL | Mac's Back in Mass. | Tue Nov 20 1990 16:47 | 12 |
| Who is at fault running up the score?
Is it the coach for allowing it to happen?
Is it the players for playing the best they know how?
Is it the "system" which rewards huge victories over mediocre opponents
and penalizes narrow victories over mediocre opponents?
Is it the "system" which relies on basic stats to cover the thousands
of college players across the country when giving out post season
awards?
Is it the "system" which gives preferential draft picks and the
accompanying $ to players who achieve personal season awards and play
for highly ranked teams?
|
| 404.40 | update bowl matchups | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Nov 26 1990 11:25 | 27 |
| Bowl Date USA Today prediction
--------------- ------- -------------------------------
California Dec 8 San Jose St vs Central Michigan
Independence Dec 15 Louisiana Tech vs Maryland
Aloha Dec 25 Arizona vs Syracuse
Liberty Dec 27 Air Force vs Ohio St
Blockbuster Dec 28 Florida St vs Penn St
All-American Dec 28 NC State vs Southern Miss
Peach Dec 29 Alabama vs Indiana
Freedom Dec 29 Oregon vs Colorado St
Holiday Dec 29 BYU vs Texas A&M
John Hancock Dec 31 Southern Cal vs Michigan St
Copper Dec 31 California vs Wyoming
Gator Jan 1 Mississippi vs Michigan
Hall of Fame Jan 1 Clemson vs Illinois
Citrus Jan 1 Georgia Tech vs Nebraska
Cotton Jan 1 Texas vs Miami-FL
Fiesta Jan 1 Auburn vs Louisville
Rose Jan 1 Washington vs Iowa
Orange Jan 1 Colorado vs Notre Dame
Sugar Jan 1 Tennessee vs Virginia
Note:
This assumes that Auburn beats Alabama. If they don't then the
SEC teams shuffle with Mississippi and Alabama rising.
TTom
|
| 404.41 | Final bowl matchups | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Mon Dec 03 1990 14:39 | 21 |
| Bowl Date Teams
--------------- ------- -------------------------------
California Dec 8 San Jose St vs Central Michigan
Independence Dec 15 Louisiana Tech vs Maryland
Aloha Dec 25 Arizona vs Syracuse
Liberty Dec 27 Air Force vs Ohio St
All-American Dec 28 NC State vs Southern Miss
Blockbuster Dec 28 Florida St vs Penn St
Peach Dec 29 Auburn vs Indiana
Holiday Dec 29 BYU vs Texas A&M
Freedom Dec 29 Oregon vs Colorado St
John Hancock Dec 31 Southern Cal vs Michigan St
Copper Dec 31 California vs Wyoming
Gator Jan 1 Mississippi vs Michigan
Hall of Fame Jan 1 Clemson vs Illinois
Citrus Jan 1 Georgia Tech vs Nebraska
Cotton Jan 1 Texas vs Miami-FL
Fiesta Jan 1 Alabama vs Louisville
Rose Jan 1 Washington vs Iowa
Orange Jan 1 Colorado vs Notre Dame
Sugar Jan 1 Tennessee vs Virginia
|
| 404.42 | | QUASER::JOHNSTON | LegitimateSportingPurpose?E.S.A.D.! | Mon Dec 03 1990 19:16 | 19 |
| Nineteen Bowls! (or Bowels..., as the case may be).
Maybe we should have a contest!
Make our picks on all of them.
Also, maybe another King of the Hill:
Pick the `Guaranteed Winners' of any 4 of the Pre-New Years Bowls.
And three of the `Guaranteed Winners' of any of the New Years Day Bowls.
Or sumpin lak dat
??????????
Mike JN
PS - If we have a contest, I vote that ACChris doesn't run it.
Or we'll all have to write a:
PAEAN TO DEAN
in order to qualify! ;'D
|
| 404.43 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Mon Dec 03 1990 20:37 | 15 |
| > Nineteen Bowls! (or Bowels..., as the case may be).
> Maybe we should have a contest!
> Make our picks on all of them.
Great idea! My suggestion is that everybody picks the bowls, placing a
point value on each one from 1 to 19 (or whatever the actual number of
bowls is). For example, if you feel strongest about the Sugar Bowl,
you would pick Tennessee for 19 points, the one you feel next strongest
about for 18 points, etc. And the bowl you feel least sure about you
would only pick for 1 point. I also say we don't include the
California Raisin Bowl. Just some thoughts.
Joe
|
| 404.44 | Keep it simple... | NAC::G_WAUGAMAN | | Tue Dec 04 1990 10:54 | 14 |
|
> Maybe we should have a contest!
> Make our picks on all of them.
Who ran the contest last year? I liked that simple format-- pick every
game against the spread, count 'em up at the end. Less luck that way,
because you're not going to win by just hitting the big ones.
I second the elimination of the Raisin Bowl. No one except maybe dan'l
knows anything about the MAC, and there probably isn't time to get
everyone's entries in by Saturday anyway...
glenn
|
| 404.45 | pick winneres | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Tue Dec 04 1990 11:04 | 5 |
| We can keep it even simpler.
Pick the winner of all the bowls and let the Raisin Bowl be the tie
breaker.
TTom
|
| 404.46 | Also, I haven't seen California, Ohio State, etc. | CSCOAC::ROLLINS_R | | Tue Dec 04 1990 11:47 | 7 |
| I think the California Raisin Bowl ought to be required. Just
because some people are not knowledgable on an area is not
justification for punsihing those who do. Otherwise, I think
we also ought to leave out those bowl games featuring WAC teams,
because I don't thinlk most people follow the WAC very closely
either. Also bowl games with Louisiana Tech and Southern Mississippi
as participants.
|
| 404.47 | Some insider trading | SHALOT::MEDVID | November spawned a monster | Tue Dec 04 1990 11:50 | 4 |
| The California Raisin Bowl is easy to call. The MAC always loses. I
think they've won once (Miami) in the bowl's history.
--dan'l
|
| 404.48 | move on over | HBAHBA::HAAS | Big Smile at the Drivethrough | Tue Dec 04 1990 12:39 | 3 |
| The contest has been started. See lasted - at this time - topic.
TTom
|
| 404.49 | Auburn and Alabama lost to So. Miss. | FDCV06::TIRRELL | | Tue Dec 04 1990 12:47 | 7 |
| Believe me, if you're a Top 20 team, you want no part of Southern
Mississippi, just ask Florida State (last year), Alabama, and Auburn,
all of whom found out the hard way. I might add that Southern Mississippi
won all three of these games on the road. They also blew out Louisville
this year for the Cardinals only loss, but in all honesty Louisville
struggled with BC, so that ought to say something about the quality of
the Louisville effort.
|
| 404.50 | | BSS::JCOTANCH | CU: Back-to-Back Big 8 Champs | Tue Dec 04 1990 13:12 | 12 |
| > Otherwise, I think
> we also ought to leave out those bowl games featuring WAC teams,
> because I don't thinlk most people follow the WAC very closely
> either.
This would be ridiculous. First of all, that would be leaving out 4
bowls. True, the WAC isn't a big-time conference, but nonetheless it's
still division 1-A. It's kind of like saying let's leave out the ACC
because some of us out West here don't follow those teams that closely.
Joe
|
| 404.51 | | CSCOAC::ROLLINS_R | | Tue Dec 04 1990 13:25 | 17 |
| >> Otherwise, I think
>> we also ought to leave out those bowl games featuring WAC teams,
>> because I don't thinlk most people follow the WAC very closely
>> either.
>
> This would be ridiculous. First of all, that would be leaving out 4
> bowls. True, the WAC isn't a big-time conference, but nonetheless it's
> still division 1-A. It's kind of like saying let's leave out the ACC
> because some of us out West here don't follow those teams that closely.
>
> Joe
I agree it would be foolish. I think the reasoning behind leaving out
the California Bowl is the exact same reasoning, and I felt that was
foolish as well. That's why I compared that reasoning to the above.
If I had compared it to something I thought was sensible, that wouldn't
have made my point, would it ?
|
| 404.52 | sugar bowel | WSE028::JOLMAMA | just wish'n and hope'n and. . | Tue Dec 04 1990 16:52 | 10 |
| The good ole boys in Texas gotta be red faced over the
selection of Virgina. Back when Virigina was top ranked,
in their haste to get a top team, the Sugar Bowl people
inked Virginia to a contract.
Now Virgina isn't even in the Top 25. Will be tough to sell
this contest and draw any positive attention to what has been
one of the better bowl games.
|
| 404.53 | When did the move it? | CSC32::J_HENSON | It's just the same, only different | Tue Dec 04 1990 18:50 | 13 |
| >> <<< Note 404.52 by WSE028::JOLMAMA "just wish'n and hope'n and. . " >>>
>> -< sugar bowel >-
>> The good ole boys in Texas gotta be red faced over the
>> selection of Virgina. Back when Virigina was top ranked,
>> in their haste to get a top team, the Sugar Bowl people
>> inked Virginia to a contract.
Pardon me, but what have "The good ole boys in Texas" got to
do with the Sugar bowl. Last I heard, the Sugar Bowl was
played in Louisiana.
Jerry
|
| 404.54 | | RAVEN1::B_ADAMS | Comin'on strong in'91 | Tue Dec 04 1990 18:57 | 7 |
| re-1,
What he's saying is that Texas should be pissed off at the Sugar
Bowl committe for selecting Va.so early in the season! That way, Texas
could have maybe gone instead of Va. Got it? good! :*)
B.A.
|
| 404.55 | Texas in Cotton for a reason | SHALOT::HUNT | Shoeless Joe Belongs In Cooperstown | Tue Dec 04 1990 19:20 | 14 |
| 404.56 | straight from the horses mouth | WSE028::JOLMAMA | just wish'n and hope'n and. . | Tue Dec 04 1990 20:16 | 3 |
| New Orleans is not in Texas? My mistake.
Matt the Mariner
|
| 404.57 | It's LOO-EEZ-EEE-ANN-AAA, fellows | SHALOT::HUNT | Shoeless Joe Belongs In Cooperstown | Tue Dec 04 1990 20:24 | 9 |
| Didn't you know, Matt, that New Orleans is actually a ...
"mildewed naval port o' call smack dab in the heart of ACC country." ???
One of the finer mistakes, that is, mistaking Norfolk for New Orleans,
from everyone's best buddy and this country's finest geography expert,
the one and the only, MrT.
Bob Hunt
|
| 404.58 | | LAGUNA::MAY_BR | Master of the Universe | Wed Dec 05 1990 12:15 | 2 |
| Given the current matchups in the bowl games this year, the Sugar is
not that much worse off than any of the others.
|