NCAAF  > General NCAAF  > Bowl Thoughts
December 6, 2010, 08:01 AM
Just wondering what everyone thinks of the bowl match-ups. Overall, I think there are some great games.

Which ones are you excited for? Which ones leave you shaking your head?
December 6, 2010  08:06 AM ET

Any one know why Nebraska and Washington are playing again? I think it will be a better game this time but I'm a little dumb-founded as to why?

December 6, 2010  08:12 AM ET

Traditionally, I like the SEC v. Big 10, ACC, etc. bowls. This year I wish they weren't contractually obligated. Boise St. v. Utah should be a fun game but wouldn't Bama v. Boise St. and MSU v. Utah be more interesting?

December 6, 2010  08:19 AM ET

I think the Nebraska/Washington match up is awful for two reasons. Mostly because it is a rematch, but also because Nebraska appears to be the much stronger team.

I think Boise St got the major shaft by drawing Utah. The best team not playing in a BCS bowl gets the team that may be the most overrated because of their record. This one won't be close and Boise won't get the chance to show what they could do against a well thought of AQ team.

I like the Notre Dame/Miami matchup if only for old times sake, and that the teams seem to be dead even.

TCU/Wisconsin which we have seen coming for a while is going to be very interesting. I hope Dalton is healthy.

Ohio St./Arkansas could be a very good one.

About half of the games carry a good deal of interest for me.

December 6, 2010  08:20 AM ET
QUOTE(#2):

Traditionally, I like the SEC v. Big 10, ACC, etc. bowls. This year I wish they weren't contractually obligated. Boise St. v. Utah should be a fun game but wouldn't Bama v. Boise St. and MSU v. Utah be more interesting?

Would rather see Bama vs BSU, but am loving the MSU/Michigan matchup.

December 6, 2010  08:23 AM ET
QUOTE(#3):

I think Boise St got the major shaft by drawing Utah. The best team not playing in a BCS bowl gets the team that may be the most overrated because of their record. This one won't be close and Boise won't get the chance to show what they could do against a well thought of AQ team.

+1 x 100. This is like the BSU/TCU matchup of last year....complete waste of two good non-AQ schools getting to "show their stuff".

Guess the powers that be don't want a repeat of Utah/Alabama and BSU/OU (ouch - that hurt!)

December 6, 2010  08:31 AM ET
QUOTE(#4):

Would rather see Bama vs BSU, but am loving the MSU/Michigan matchup.

I meant Michigan St. but I agree about the Mississippi St. v. Michigan game. Defense of MSU v. offense of Michigan. MSU wins 10-7 or Michigan wins 35-31. It could be either.

December 6, 2010  08:50 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Any one know why Nebraska and Washington are playing again?

I was pretty amazed when I heard this too. It doesn't make any sense at all from a matchup point of view, but the bowls are about $ - not good matchups.

I think the Huskies will be fired up, and Nebraska could be on let-down alert.
I still think Neb wins, but this should be a good game.

Either way, this is a huge improvement for UW who hasn't seen a bowl game since 2002.

December 6, 2010  08:52 AM ET
QUOTE(#3):

I think Boise St got the major shaft by drawing Utah.

Agreed.

December 6, 2010  08:53 AM ET
QUOTE(#5):

+1 x 100. This is like the BSU/TCU matchup of last year....complete waste of two good non-AQ schools getting to "show their stuff". Guess the powers that be don't want a repeat of Utah/Alabama and BSU/OU (ouch - that hurt!)

I don't agree with the whole "powers that be" conspiracy thing and I think it works against Boise St and not so much Utah. Utah doesn't have a good enough team to prove much of anything against anyone that is good this year and so maybe getting embarrassed by Boise will at least be easier to accept than by one of the better AQ schools.

Boise on the other hand could play and very possibly beat anyone that is up there, and could embarrass many mid-level AQ teams. The Utah match up must be a bitter pill for them.

December 6, 2010  08:56 AM ET
QUOTE(#7):

, but the bowls are about $ - not good matchups.

I understand the money part, but you would think that interesting matchups would also be in the mix. Guess this is why the bowl picture before the BCS were so good....got some good matchups. AND, when the 1 and 2 did play it was a really big deal...

December 6, 2010  08:57 AM ET
QUOTE(#9):

I don't agree with the whole "powers that be" conspiracy thing and I think it works against Boise St and not so much Utah. Utah doesn't have a good enough team to prove much of anything against anyone that is good this year and so maybe getting embarrassed by Boise will at least be easier to accept than by one of the better AQ schools. Boise on the other hand could play and very possibly beat anyone that is up there, and could embarrass many mid-level AQ teams. The Utah match up must be a bitter pill for them.

Not to be cynical....but this is two years in a row that BSU has NOT gotten to play a "powerhouse" team....does tend to make one think??????

December 6, 2010  09:04 AM ET
QUOTE(#11):

Not to be cynical....but this is two years in a row that BSU has NOT gotten to play a "powerhouse" team....does tend to make one think??????

I understand. Just to be clear, when I say I don't believe in the 'powers that be conspiracy theories', I am not talking about economics. Many tend to believe there is a small cadre of folks somewhere that make these back room decisions to build up the BCS and build up the AQ teams and to keep the non-AQ schools in their place. I don't buy it at all. Dollars make the decisions, and that is the natural order of the world, like it or not. A conspiracy can be formulated to explain anything that seems unfair or out of sorts.

December 6, 2010  09:06 AM ET
QUOTE(#12):

Many tend to believe .

We are legend

December 6, 2010  09:13 AM ET
QUOTE(#6):

but I agree about the Mississippi St. v. Michigan game. Defense of MSU v. offense of Michigan. MSU wins 10-7 or Michigan wins 35-31. It could be either.

This game fascinates me as well. When I look at it one way I think, how can Miss St ever score enough points to hang with Michigan? They don't have enough at the skill posiitions. Then I look at it another way and I think...there's no team on earth that can't score on Michigan. So who knows? I think it is more likely to be 35-31 than 10-7 but I see what you are saying.

December 6, 2010  09:26 AM ET
QUOTE(#14):

This game fascinates me as well. When I look at it one way I think, how can Miss St ever score enough points to hang with Michigan? They don't have enough at the skill posiitions. Then I look at it another way and I think...there's no team on earth that can't score on Michigan. So who knows? I think it is more likely to be 35-31 than 10-7 but I see what you are saying.

Unfortunately MstU won't have their top receiver (Bumphis is out), but they have some decent WR's and a hoss for a RB in Ballard (892 yds and 16 TD's). If Relf plays a good game, could win easily...but if Relf is off...could be Katie bar the door...

December 6, 2010  09:36 AM ET

The Big Ten runs the risk of embarrassing the conference in national perception. Say Ohio State and Wisconsin lose, how badly would the Big ten suffer for losing to an SEC #2 and a non-BCS school. Wisconsin has little to gain in perception but everything to lose. Ohio State has a little respect to gain (but they aren't playing Auburn) from a win and countless years of trash-talk if they lose.

December 6, 2010  09:43 AM ET
QUOTE(#16):

The Big Ten runs the risk of embarrassing the conference in national perception. Say Ohio State and Wisconsin lose, how badly would the Big ten suffer for losing to an SEC #2 and a non-BCS school. Wisconsin has little to gain in perception but everything to lose. Ohio State has a little respect to gain (but they aren't playing Auburn) from a win and countless years of trash-talk if they lose.

Unfair but true about the Wisconsin/TCU match up. Sort of either a no win or lose big scenario for the Big 10 and Wisconsin.

Every conference and team feels at least some of this angst. Look at all the jackals waiting to assail the SEC if they slip up in the least. There would be a blood feast.

December 6, 2010  09:57 AM ET
QUOTE(#9):

The Utah match up must be a bitter pill for them.

The WAC and MWC have had this tie-in for a while though. Actually, I don't think Utah is as bad as some people are thinking, nor as good as some people thought previously. I do think Notre Dame is playing some good football(gag, gag) right now.

December 6, 2010  10:13 AM ET
QUOTE(#17):

Unfair but true about the Wisconsin/TCU match up. Sort of either a no win or lose big scenario for the Big 10 and Wisconsin. Every conference and team feels at least some of this angst. Look at all the jackals waiting to assail the SEC if they slip up in the least. There would be a blood feast.

But seriously, the SEC has 4 national titles. A slip up is much more forgivable because the perceived gap is so large. It takes a skid of a few years to destroy perception. The Big Ten had one good year last year. It badly needs a second in a row.

On the other hand< i don't think Bama-Michigan State or Florida-Penn State will have much impact either way.

 
December 6, 2010  10:32 AM ET
QUOTE(#19):

But seriously, the SEC has 4 national titles. A slip up is much more forgivable because the perceived gap is so large. It takes a skid of a few years to destroy perception. The Big Ten had one good year last year. It badly needs a second in a row.

I agree with you from a national perspective. I was looking more at the legion of SEC haters that inhabit the fannation boards. They mostly believe that the national perception is completely founded on ESPN and CBS media hype.

There is a lot to be gained or lost for the Big 10 this year as a whole, so I think the lower tier games against the SEC are important.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    D'Antoni's newest 'blunder'
    Views
    1462
    Comments
    764
  2. 2
    Irving: Fans don't deserve the Cavs
    Views
    24246
    Comments
    684
  3. 3
    Baseball's top 2015 free agent
    Views
    1448
    Comments
    526
  4. 4
    Red Sox dodged two injury scares
    Views
    3477
    Comments
    504
  5. 5
    The NHL's model franchise?
    Views
    1531
    Comments
    130

SI.com

SI Photos