big east preseason poll

[Inchickinkick]

are our cats better than a fifth place preseason big east ranking?

[shaunsimpson]

I believe so, but there is a lot of uncertainty with the Cats this year. Much easier to pick WVU, Louisville and Rutgers. I was thinking 4th. I think that USF will be better than Pitt this year, but Pitt has had two good recruiting classes in a row.

[Inchickinkick]

do you think 7 wins could get uc in a bowl game?

[shaunsimpson]

I would think it does, but a lot of that depends on two things.
1) How many bowl elgible teams and Big East teams (also, does Navy and ND steal one two of the Big East bowl spots)
2) Did our attendance numbers for the year show that we will travel well?

[jkwuc89]

Postseason play should not be dependent upon attendance figures. This is yet another flaw in a highly flawed bowl system.

Postseason play should be 100% based upon results on the field. Imagine if the NCAA Tournament Selection committee for Men's Basketball used attendance figures to determine at-large bids?

[Inchickinkick]

what would this team half too do to win a bowl bid?

[qsilvr2531]

The NIT selection committee does use attendance figures to determine postseason play, at least from what I recall. The bowl system isn't a playoff and really shouldn't be compared to the NCAA tournament. No matter how many motor city bowls or international bowls you win, you can't win a national title. Given the small number of games each team plays and the significantly different schedules it would be almost impossible to make bowl selections based 100% on the results on the field. It also wouldn't make much sense to the bowls, which only exist to make money. Forcing them to take teams that will make them less money is a quick way to decrease the number of bowls (not necessarily a bad thing, IMO).

[red_n_black_attack]

Pre-season rankings are just that, somebody's best guess at how a team will perform. There are many changes in every program from year to year, seniors gone, new freshmen or redshirts, returning players from injury or transfer, new coaches, new assistant coaches, the fact that these guys are 18-21 years old and each is driven differently.

A pre-season 5th place ranking is right in the middle, we could probably argue 4th, but why? Let's play the games and let the polls and rankings come by how teams gel and play as a team. The Bearcats will surprise some teams this year and finish in the top 3, INMHO

BOWL GAMES: This team will be in a major bowl this year or next. Go to the games, support the kids and coaches.

Cancel your subscriptions to the Enquirer. (It is free online - for now which is their big mistake anyway!)

GO CATS!!

[shaunsimpson]

Postseason play should not be dependent upon attendance figures. This is yet another flaw in a highly flawed bowl system.

Postseason play should be 100% based upon results on the field.

I agree with this 100%, but I think we all realize that it isn't the case. Even the BCS at large teams are selected with attendance figures in mind. Notre Dame makes BCS games when we know they are going to get killed - which they get killed often in bowl games.

[Inchickinkick]

do you think 7 wins could get uc in a bowl game?

good question any answers

[Inchickinkick]

what would this team half too do to win a bowl bid?

good questions, any answers

[swilsonsp4]

do you think 7 wins could get uc in a bowl game?

Considering that 64 of the 119 1-A schools (53.8%) will go bowling, it's pretty hard not to qualify with seven wins. In fact, it's nearly a certainty that teams with 6-6 records will play in bowl games. Bowl eligibility is extended to all teams with seven or more wins before any six-win teams are considered, as happened this past season. Therefore, seven will do it.

But, why settle for seven?

[jkwuc89]

Yet another reason why the bowl system is flawed. .500 teams have NO BUSINESS being in a bowl game. IMHO, 7 - 5 teams don't belong either because the NCAA now allows one win against a lower division school. The minimum win total should be 8. I know that this would eliminate several bowl games because there won't be enough qualifiers but that is good. There are two many bowl games as it is.

I hope in the not too distant future that we end up with a season where there are not enough .500 and above teams to fill the bowl slots. Imagine the embarrassment of having to invite a sub-.500 team to a bowl.

[qsilvr2531]

Why do .500 teams have no business being in a bowl game? If there is enough demand for bowls that 6-6 teams are needed to play in them, why not let them? It's not like the game counts anymore than any regular season game.

[Irishbearcat]

I think the rankings were fair. Surprised at how far Syracuse has fallen. USF may be a comer. Rutgers and Pitt, to me, remains the biggest question marks the next couple years.

[jkwuc89]

I have a big problem with rewarding mediocrity. .500 = average = mediocrity, especially when you consider that one of the 6 wins can be had against a lower division cupcake.

[Inchickinkick]

SE Missouri State
Oregan State
@Miami Oh.
Marshall
@San Diego State
--------------------
@Rutgers
Louisville
@Pittsburgh
@USF
UCONN
West Virgina
@Syracuse

How many wins?

[jkwuc89]

If I was a betting man, I would put the over/under wins line at 7. I think there are seven very winnable games on this schedule, 6 of which should be near locks. My near locks are: SW Miss. St., Miami(OH), Marshall, SDSU, UConn, and Syracuse. Pitt or USF would be the 7th win.

I think Rutgers, Louisville and WVU are the biggest trouble spots. Fortunately, the Bearcats get Louisville and WVU at home. I suspect that Rutgers will have revenge on their minds when UC comes calling so I would be a bit surprised if UC were able to go there and grab a win.

[qsilvr2531]

I think 7 is a good number for the over/under.

I don't really have a problem with rewarding mediocrity when the reward is the Panera Bread presents the first annual Blueberry bowl (or whatever the bottom level bowl currently is). Post season play in football is so different than postseason play in any other college sport that I just don't really care who is or isn't allowed to play. If there is a market for all of these bowl games, they might as well have someone play in them. It's a nice experience for the players, it's better for competitive balance to give as many teams as possible the extra month of practice, and it doesn't really hurt anything as non of the bowls we are talking about (the types that a 6-6 team can go to) will ever have any bearing on the top 25, much less the championship.

[bearcatmark]

I think South Florida will be a tougher matchup for us than Rutgers truth be told. I thought going in to last years game we had the perfect team for beating Rutgers. This year i still think we match them incredibly well. The @ South Florida game could be very very tough. The Oregon State game also should be a very tough test. I think we matchup the poorest with WVU, though i think Kelly's offense will be a better test for them and Dantonio's.

UC will be very tough to predict this year... We played our best with Davilia...so different QB and an entirely new coaching staff make it hard.

I think 7 for the over under is a good prediction... I'd take to over.

8 to 10 wins

[shaunsimpson]

Who runs the bowl games? I may not have asked that correctly, but I was wondering if the NCAA has to sanction the bowls or how it works. I know the BCS is independent of a lot of what is the NCAA.

[bearcatmark]

The NCAA really is in charge of very little in college football. The Bowls are all privately owned. The BCS is basically an agreement between the conferences. There is really no "true" college football champion.

[shaunsimpson]

Do they have to sanction the bowls? The bowls must work if they continue to exist and even though a 7-5 team doesn't seem to deserve one they will continue to go to them.

[Inchickinkick]

Not having Simpson, How does that effect our season?