NCAA allowing toe FBS wins to count towards bowl eligibility

[starkvegasdawg]

The plantation has hope.

[ScoobaDawg]

Counting toes for wins? that's a new one...

[dantheman4248]

Here's the actual details:

Two wins against FCS count. Also FCS scholly % relaxes from 90% to 80% over two year average.

[starkvegasdawg]

Counting toes for wins? that's a new one...

This little piggy went to Belk. This little piggy stayed home.

[Todd4State]

Time to call up Mississippi Valley State.

[Barkman Turner Overdrive]

Time to call up Mississippi Valley State.

I will restate what I have said before. I am ok with it if we play eight SEC teams, two in-State teams, Tulane, and Indiana every year. Have six winnable games built in every year.

[HoopsDawg]

I will restate what I have said before. I am ok with it if we play eight SEC teams, two in-State teams, Tulane, and Indiana every year. Have six winnable games built in every year.

Just so I'm clear with your thought process and others who think like you, you are fine playing 4 dog shit games to be sure we are eligible for some dog shit, meaningless bowl game? I used to think that way back in 2000, but now the playoffs have made nearly all bowl games meaningless. Not to mention there are 50 bowls and it's a money machine for bowl people.

[Walkerhill]

Just so I'm clear with your thought process and others who think like you, you are fine playing 4 dog shit games to be sure we are eligible for some dog shit, meaningless bowl game? I used to think that way back in 2000, but now the playoffs have made nearly all bowl games meaningless. Not to mention there are 50 bowls and it's a money machine for bowl people.

I love this bravado man. Way to be!

Of course, in real life you and everyone else will be bitching if we lose a challenging non-conference and struggle to make bowl eligibility. And then that negativity impacts the program and recruiting and young players get less garbage time pt and potentially miss out on bowl practices and through all of this you enter a vicious cycle of bitching and whining about the program.

Give me 4 winnable non-conference and a bowl and let the team get up for the big SEC games healthy and confident after feasting on cupcake.

[DownwardDawg]

I love this bravado man. Way to be!

Of course, in real life you and everyone else will be bitching if we lose a challenging non-conference and struggle to make bowl eligibility. And then that negativity impacts the program and recruiting and young players get less garbage time pt and potentially miss out on bowl practices and through all of this you enter a vicious cycle of bitching and whining about the program.

Give me 4 winnable non-conference and a bowl and let the team get up for the big SEC games healthy and confident after feasting on cupcake.

This is the smart thought process. We ain’t Bama.

[Jack Lambert]

Time to call up Mississippi Valley State.

If ole miss could get pass their racist pride they would schedule them twice.

[HoopsDawg]

hate that b/c I hate those games with a passion. Almost prefer a bye week. This will encourage AD's to keep scheduling them.

[Todd4State]

hate that b/c I hate those games with a passion. Almost prefer a bye week. This will encourage AD's to keep scheduling them.

I'm more interested in playing Mississippi Valley than I am NC State to be honest with you.

Not every game has to be against a challenging opponent.

[HoopsDawg]

I'm more interested in playing Mississippi Valley than I am NC State to be honest with you.

Not every game has to be against a challenging opponent.

That boggles my mind. A lot of people share your opinion. But I have no interest in watching us play Valley or Alabama A&M or even teams like New Mexico.

[Todd4State]

That boggles my mind. A lot of people share your opinion. But I have no interest in watching us play Valley or Alabama A&M or even teams like New Mexico.

I'll just choose to respond to this and speaking indirectly of the other comments.

Yes, I have more interest in watching MSU play SWAC teams than NC State. Probably personal to a degree since I grew up watching Sports Journal and Rob Jay who made the SWAC sound like the coolest football league ever. I would prefer in state SWAC teams over Alabama A&M but I understand the issues with JSU wanting too much money and Valley not having enough scholarships to qualify for bowl eligibility. I guarantee you our players would rather play an in state SWAC team over say Stephen F Austin because some of them grew up pulling for some of them I'm sure and they know players on those teams moreso than other schools.

Now as far as the "meaningless" bowl games- the bowls are probably the biggest reason why our program has steadily been elevating itself over the past decade. MSU gets millions of much needed money for playing in one. It's odd to me that you say that a bowl game against a team like Louisville, Iowa, Michigan, Georgia Tech, and etc. are "meaningless" yet you advocate for playing a "meaningless" regular season game against those teams which would cost MSU more in money and exposure while not helping to elevate the program. Bowl games are about as close as we are going to come to having full exposure on the football program in this day and age because of the time slots.

The people that share my opinion are the ones that know what's best for MSU as a program and want to see it continue to grow. Going 4-8 every year and bragging about having the most difficult schedule in college football doesn't help MSU. We essentially are scheduling the same way Alabama is right now.

[msbulldog]

I'll just choose to respond to this and speaking indirectly of the other comments.

Yes, I have more interest in watching MSU play SWAC teams than NC State. Probably personal to a degree since I grew up watching Sports Journal and Rob Jay who made the SWAC sound like the coolest football league ever. I would prefer in state SWAC teams over Alabama A&M but I understand the issues with JSU wanting too much money and Valley not having enough scholarships to qualify for bowl eligibility. I guarantee you our players would rather play an in state SWAC team over say Stephen F Austin because some of them grew up pulling for some of them I'm sure and they know players on those teams moreso than other schools.

Now as far as the "meaningless" bowl games- the bowls are probably the biggest reason why our program has steadily been elevating itself over the past decade. MSU gets millions of much needed money for playing in one. It's odd to me that you say that a bowl game against a team like Louisville, Iowa, Michigan, Georgia Tech, and etc. are "meaningless" yet you advocate for playing a "meaningless" regular season game against those teams which would cost MSU more in money and exposure while not helping to elevate the program. Bowl games are about as close as we are going to come to having full exposure on the football program in this day and age because of the time slots.

The people that share my opinion are the ones that know what's best for MSU as a program and want to see it continue to grow. Going 4-8 every year and bragging about having the most difficult schedule in college football doesn't help MSU. We essentially are scheduling the same way Alabama is right now.

Not to be disagreeable Todd, but all SEC bowl money goes into a pot to be split among all teams. The participating teams get a little extra share that usually just covers their bowl expenses, unless it's one of the bigger bowls. Schools carry way more than the football teams to the bowls and pay their expenses. And generally each school has to guarantee so many tickets sold and if they don't sell the schools have to eat them.

[gtowndawg]

That boggles my mind. A lot of people share your opinion. But I have no interest in watching us play Valley or Alabama A&M or even teams like New Mexico.

I like the easy win games for non conference and here's why (for me). Those are the absolute best time to take my family (at least my boys). There's no nervousness or drama with a big game. It's just easy going, relaxed. We eat, we walk around, we hang out for player pictures with the kids after the game. You know we are going to win and everyone is in a good mode (kids don't care who we beat, just that we won). It's literally just a family day with the game itself being an excuse to be together.

[The Federalist Engineer]

I like the easy win games for non conference and here's why (for me). Those are the absolute best time to take my family (at least my boys). There's no nervousness or drama with a big game. It's just easy going, relaxed. We eat, we walk around, we hang out for player pictures with the kids after the game. You know we are going to win and everyone is in a good mode (kids don't care who we beat, just that we won). It's literally just a family day with the game itself being an excuse to be together.

To each his own, but you might as well just watch a spring game. As a coach, you rather play Clemson and Ohio State as exhibition match.

If I were a football fan, it would be more interesting to watch an exhibition game vs Oklahoma and see 85 players participate (red shirts play exhibition) and every snap is interesting.

In fact, for baseball. It would be cool if we played 2 additional exhibition SEC games each weekend. Friday Afternoon and Saturday Noon with non-27 roster players. You will have enough players. This gives development and AB's to players that will otherwise get very limited game play. But it would be great to see our Freshmen vs Gator Freshmen, Vandy Freshman, and Auburn Freshman. We would probably see freshman move into huge roles by May and June after 20 games in the SEC Freshman League.

[Johnson85]

I'm more interested in playing Mississippi Valley than I am NC State to be honest with you.

Not every game has to be against a challenging opponent.

Not every game, but you want two of our twelve games to be against teams not even on the same level of play? There is a difference between P5 and G5 schools, but we're still generally playing by the same playbook. There's not really a difference between DII and FCS schools as far as competitiveness except in rare occasions.

I'm fine with an FCS game. I don't enjoy them that much, but it gives us a chance to rest people, play some young people, and get a cheap game towards bowl eligibility. Even if it's not very helpful for the starters, I suspect it gives the younger backups something to get excited and stay focused for, especially with the 4 game redshirt rule. I think all that makes it a good tradeoff, plus if we can play an instate school, it helps them out.

But as to having another one, we already get an FCS game and two G5 games. That's three games that shouldn't be that challenging if we are taking care of our program, unless we just get really unlucky with scheduling. If we didn't have to schedule a P5 OOC, I'd be fine with 3 G5 games just because we have such a tough road in the SEC. But I think scheduling a second FCS game would be ridiculous. The only thing that makes this palatable at all is that it will potentially make buy games with G5 schools more reasonable, as there is always the threat of replacing them with a FCS opponent.

[Todd4State]

Not every game, but you want two of our twelve games to be against teams not even on the same level of play? There is a difference between P5 and G5 schools, but we're still generally playing by the same playbook. There's not really a difference between DII and FCS schools as far as competitiveness except in rare occasions.

I'm fine with an FCS game. I don't enjoy them that much, but it gives us a chance to rest people, play some young people, and get a cheap game towards bowl eligibility. Even if it's not very helpful for the starters, I suspect it gives the younger backups something to get excited and stay focused for, especially with the 4 game redshirt rule. I think all that makes it a good tradeoff, plus if we can play an instate school, it helps them out.

But as to having another one, we already get an FCS game and two G5 games. That's three games that shouldn't be that challenging if we are taking care of our program, unless we just get really unlucky with scheduling. If we didn't have to schedule a P5 OOC, I'd be fine with 3 G5 games just because we have such a tough road in the SEC. But I think scheduling a second FCS game would be ridiculous. The only thing that makes this palatable at all is that it will potentially make buy games with G5 schools more reasonable, as there is always the threat of replacing them with a FCS opponent.

No I don't want 2 FCS teams in a TYPICAL year- but this is not a typical year. I only think we should play the one like we do now. I think more than one FCS team in a TYPICAL year is too many.

I personally don't like that we have to play the P5 game because it costs MSU more money and it's difficult for us to schedule home and homes. And I don't like the SEC telling us what we have to do with our OOC schedule. But it is what it is.

As it is I'm OK with how we schedule currently for the most part within the parameters that MSU controls. If I could change something it would be just go to a 9 game SEC schedule and then have 2 OOC G5 games, and one FCS game. I would much rather watch us play a SEC team than K-State even if it's Vanderbilt or Mizzou. I also think we schedule our P5's way too far in advance and if we have to play one I would like to see a Kickoff Classic thrown in there every three years or so. I have no idea why Ole Miss gets invited to those and we have only had that happen once.

[Commercecomet24]

I hope this is a good sign that means we are playing football this fall.