Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Getting into a bowl at 5-7?

ahoelsken

ahoelsken

Well-Known Member
Seems like this could be a possibility.....We have 39 bowl games (would need 78 teams). 50 bowl eligible teams with 20 others needing one more win for bowl eligibility.....I think we're probably looking at 3-5 teams who get in either via the APR rule or 6-7 teams who play at Hawaii (not sure what would take precedence. Not sure if the latter would apply to anyone this year though. If anybody knows more about this than I, feel free to add more knowledge here. I'll look more into it in a bit.
 
That's our system.

I really hate the way it is these days.

Honestly, I wish that P5 teams only played P5 teams and they had to go at least 6-6 to go to a bowl.

I mean, how the hell do you qualify for the post-season when you don't go .500 against peers? CU would be 2-7 against peers if this happened. I'll gladly take the extra practices and the benefits to recruiting. I'll cheer loud and hard. But that doesn't change that the system is bull****.
 
Buffnik said:
That's our system.

I really hate the way it is these days.

Honestly, I wish that P5 teams only played P5 teams and they had to go at least 6-6 to go to a bowl.

I mean, how the hell do you qualify for the post-season when you don't go .500 against peers? CU would be 2-7 against peers if this happened. I'll gladly take the extra practices and the benefits to recruiting. I'll cheer loud and hard. But that doesn't change that the system is bull****.
Click to expand...
There were 11 P5 teams that made a bowl game with a losing conference record in 2016. I didn’t go through each of those 11 schedules to see if any OOC wins were against P5 teams, but the first number below represents the number of teams in each conference that had a .500 conference record or above and the number in () is the total number of Bowl teams from that conference. There were also 3 G5 teams that made Bowl games with losing conference records, making 14 total teams that generally didn’t deserve to be playing in the postseason last year.

ACC - 8 (11)
Big 12 - 4 (6)
Big 10 - 8 (10)
Pac 12 - 6 (6)
SEC - 8 (12)
 
Here's a list of teams who might finish 5-7 (anybody from 2-7 to 5-4) and have better APRs than us

Temple
UConn
Cincinnati
Navy
Georgia Tech
Pitt
Duke
Syracuse
Louisville
Boston College
Rutgers
Indiana
Nebraska
AFA
Utah State
Texas
Kansas State
MTSU
CMU
Kent State
Illinois
Hawaii
Oregon
Cal
ASU
UCLA
Florida
Missouri
Tennessee
Vandy
 
Unlike some folks here, I'm not well informed about TV contracts for sports events. I wonder how some of these lower lever Dog Chow Bowls make money. Can't some of them be financially starved into extinction? I don't like 6-win teams playing in bowls much less 5-win. As BP says above, though, it's good to get the extra practice time.
 
ahoelsken said:
Here's a list of teams who might finish 5-7 (anybody from 2-7 to 5-4) and have better APRs than us

Temple
UConn
Cincinnati
Navy
Georgia Tech
Pitt
Duke
Syracuse
Louisville
Boston College
Rutgers
Indiana
Nebraska
AFA
Utah State
Texas
Kansas State
MTSU
CMU
Kent State
Illinois
Hawaii
Oregon
Cal
ASU
UCLA
Florida
Missouri
Tennessee
Vandy
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I can see a lot of teams on this list being picked over us APR or not.
 
Fight CU said:
mildly attractive woman at the bar says she wants it, NOW. you say no. got it.
Click to expand...
Well I am married, so there is that. In my single days, she wouldn't have had to be mildly attractive, not hideous or wouldn't regret it in the morning would have sufficed.

Back to the bowl question though, from a philosophical standpoint, no 5-7 team should be in a bowl. From a competitive nature though, I would take it because it gives you 20 extra practices. Until the NCAA levels the field and allows non bowl teams to schedule 20 post season practices, I would take a bowl bid no matter what our record is.
 
AeroBuff99 said:
Well I am married, so there is that. In my single days, she wouldn't have had to be mildly attractive, not hideous or wouldn't regret it in the morning would have sufficed.

Back to the bowl question though, from a philosophical standpoint, no 5-7 team should be in a bowl. From a competitive nature though, I would take it because it gives you 20 extra practices. Until the NCAA levels the field and allows non bowl teams to schedule 20 post season practices, I would take a bowl bid no matter what our record is.
Click to expand...

I don't like the idea of it either......but I'll take the bowl bid. Being able to make the postseason and earn the extra practices would be good for the program, whether or not we get there at 6-6 or 5-7
 
If 5-7 gets us a feather in our cap for recruiting and extra practices I’ll take it. It’s better to say you made the godaddychipotlepizzahutchasewellsfargototal****ingnonsense bowl than to say you didn’t.
 
Last edited:
It is what it is. I think if CU had been coming off the 90's and early 2000's type seasons, most would be pissed about the notion of a 5-7 team going to a bowl game. However, CU is coming off a decade of crap and they need a bowl game any way they can get it. You can hate it as much as you want, but they need a bowl game to at least show progress is still happening to recruits (however small that may be).
 
You can disagree with the allowance of a sub .500 team making a bowl game (especially a team whose 3/5 wins come against G5 and FCS teams), but CU desperately needs to get to two bowl games in a row and have the extra practices for recruiting/player development purposes.
 
What looks worse? A 5-7 team going to a bowl game or that you couldn’t even make it to a bowl game.
 
As has been previously discussed here, we are not one of the priority choices among those with losing records, so the question is moot. Although hearing different takes on it is informative.
 
aghcsm said:
As has been previously discussed here, we are not one of the priority choices among those with losing records, so the question is moot. Although hearing different takes on it is informative.
Click to expand...
It's not moot; there are 3 weeks left. Pointing out a long list of teams that "could" end up 5-7 with a better APR is stupid.
 
TSchekler said:
It's not moot; there are 3 weeks left. Pointing out a long list of teams that "could" end up 5-7 with a better APR is stupid.
Click to expand...
Closing out the season with 3 losses and losing 7 of 9 would not be very attractive even for the Toilet Bowl. Best to make this discussion moot by winning vs SC.
 
There are too many bowls. I think you should have a winning record to go to a bowl, period. (7-5 or better)

That said, if the invite is there, you should take it.

Overall, this is a more depressing thread than all of the fire the coach threads. There's still 2 chances to get that necessary 6th win.
 
At 5-7 you are probably going to a bowl game that will not make the program any money. I don't believe the bowl game like that will have any impact on recruiting. The only reason to do it is the extra practice.
 
  • Extra Practices
  • More coaching contact and development opportunity
  • Good for the Seniors
  • Never say no to free money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top