Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

I got to believe the MAC office wouldn't mind seeing Buffalo come out of the east and somehow make it to the International Bowl in Toronto.

Just as they did at the MAC basketball tourney a few years ago, Buffalo fans will travel well when they get their first taste of division 1 success in a sport. I got to believe that they would take plenty of fans on the hour trip north on the QEW to Toronto for that game.

But if bowls have their choice, I got to believe Ball State, CMU and WMU are the three most attractive MAC teams.

I want to see a MAC team kick Notre Dame's ass in the International Bowl.

Is there even a guarantee a team from the East will go? I mean, I understand that the team going to the MACC from the division is bowl worthy, but with Ball State, Western and Central likely to have better records than any team in the East, is there a chance that the East representative gets screwed out of a bowl bid? It'll be interesting to keep tabs on.

I thought the MAC made a rule about this before last year saying that the MACC participants are guaranteed a bowl spot, if eligible. Miami(OH) lost the MACC to go to 6-7, so we went bowling instead.

TG1996 wrote:I thought the MAC made a rule about this before last year saying that the MACC participants are guaranteed a bowl spot, if eligible. Miami(OH) lost the MACC to go to 6-7, so we went bowling instead.

First: The fact that BG went bowling in 2007 wasn't about our division. It was more due to the fact that there were no other eligible teams in the league with winning records.

I think that, in most cases, the MAC would like to see both division winners in bowl games. But I'm not sure it's written down.

And, frankly, when I look at the seasons Ball State, Central Michigan and Western Michigan are having, I don't think any school in the east deserves a bowl game over a West team.

Unless an East team wins the MAC title, I'd be comfortable with no East teams getting bowl games this year. And, yes, I know the Falcons could be giving up a bowl game to Western Michigan in that scenario. But -- look at the standings. It isn't even really close.

To play in the MAC title game would be reward enough for a 7-5 regular season.

If the Falcons were to go 8-5 and win the MAC? Then of course the MAC champion would deserve a bowl game. The MAC champ should always go to a bowl game, no matter what.

I think the previous responses show accurate information. The East winner does go, provided eligible (i.e. winning record), and that was why Miami stayed home eventhough they "technically" won the east last year.

But I am not positive that we would go when 2 others in the West, not counting the West winner, could have better records.

But who knows! This only gets more interesting after the Buffalo game and WITH a win.

Throw in some talk about negating wins against Div 1-AA teams, winning records of BCS conference #7 seeds with 6-6 records and then it will get interesting

Want some real fun? Figure out Stewart Mandel:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/w ... ml?eref=T1

Says BG will be the only team above .500 to not go bowling. Yet UB is going to Hawaii as an at-large bid.

SO many things that are wrong with that. I don't want to say it's NOT possible, but it's pretty impossible for both of those to happen.

TG1996 wrote:Want some real fun? Figure out Stewart Mandel:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/w ... ml?eref=T1

Says BG will be the only team above .500 to not go bowling. Yet UB is going to Hawaii as an at-large bid.

SO many things that are wrong with that. I don't want to say it's NOT possible, but it's pretty impossible for both of those to happen.

Lets wait and see how the last two games play out. In any case, right now, under the "what have you done for us lately" file, BG has a massive blow-out with little fan following in the bowl last year.

And this presumes GMAC isn't out of business and the game canceled.

I'm not talking about "how the season plays out". I'm saying this so-called "expert" has his math all but wrong.

Given what the bowls like to consider when looking at invites, I don't know that BG has much more to offer than UB. And esp. if you consider losing badly in your third bowl game in five years worse than having never gone to a bowl game, nor come close. But when you figure out scenarios like Mandel did, claiming BG will finish above .500, which definitely means a win over Buffalo and likely/possibly a trip to the MACC, but then say a (in his scenario, not mine) 7-5 AT BEST Buffalo team that lost to BG gets an at large bid?

Not likely, I say.

Again, I'm not talking about what WILL happen, I'm just saying Mandel is a chodesmoker.

Ok, I've given Mandel's picks a quick look and I might have found another potential problem.

He has NIU going to the New Mexico bowl. If BGSU finishes above .500 as he predicts, then (I think) NIU would have to finish 7-5 to go to a bowl according to this rule:

"Finally, a bowl can only select a 6-6 team from a conference if no 7-5 team from that league is still available."

I think a similar rule would apply if BGSU goes to the MACC, loses, and therefore is 7-6.

Anyway, I don't think NIU will beat either Central or Navy.

I think BG deserves a bowl with a win in the MAC title game...other than that, as much as I want to go bowling, I don't think we've had the year to do that. Like SF said, the West teams are much more deserving this year.

Gotta win 3 in a row to go bowling, IMO.

Most interesting is that this guy projects TWO teams from the EAST to go to bowls...obviously, one will likely get a bid as the East champ,unless of course, they pull a 2007 Miami. and wind up under .500.
But he also projects all three of the "regular" MAC tie-ins to go to the West. division teams... not saying it SHOULD"NT be that way, but I don't think that the 3rd place MAC west team would be rated ABOVE the East champ.

Of course, all of this conjecture is simply a way to get all of us thinking about bowls...when, in our case, we should ONLY be thinking about Buffalo right now.

Didn't notice NIU and Akron on the list. Dude's high, it'll be interesting to see how he changes up next week.

TG1996 wrote:Didn't notice NIU and Akron on the list. Dude's high, it'll be interesting to see how he changes up next week.

It just shows again and again that the "experts" do not follow the MAC and put about as much time into researching the MAC as it did for me to post this sentence.

tiznow wrote: It just shows again and again that the "experts" do not follow the MAC and put about as much time into researching the MAC as it did for me to post this sentence.

Yours was a well-researched sentence, though.