MWC wins the Bowl Challenge Cup

Regardless of the finish of the Fiesta Bowl, the MWC has clinched the Bowl Challenge Cup! 5-0 will just be icing.



MWC 4-0 100% (worst possible finish: 4-1 and 80%)



Other Conferences' best possible finishes



Big 12: 6-2, 75%

Big 10: 5-2, 71%

SEC: 7-3, 70%

Big East: 4-2, 66%

ACC: 4-3, 57%

WAC: 2-2, 50%

C-USA: 3-3, 50%

MAC: 2-3, 40%



Pac10: 2-5, 28% (no remaining games)



*Sunbelt could finish 2-0, but conferences must have at least 3 games to qualify

i love how the pac-0 gets its own separate line for sub-mediocrity. I loved watching them have their arrogant little butts handed to them in MWC and Big 10 platters.

Of course most the MWC wins will be chalked up to inferior opponents (Fresno) or unmotivated teams (OSU, Cal). I think that while BYU's performance was the most dominant so far, AFA's win might be the most important for the MWC so far.



TCU's game is still the most important for the conference.

What other pac 10 team won. I watched USC win but every other pac 10 team I saw play lost. Did ASU get to a bowl game and win? I can't think of who could have gotten the 2nd win.



EDIT: NM, I remembered, UCLA won thier bowl game.

declocoug wrote:
Of course most the MWC wins will be chalked up to inferior opponents (Fresno) or unmotivated teams (OSU, Cal).

The same could be said for almost any bowl win by any team. Because of conference tie-ins, bowls tend to be very inefficient at matching teams--usually one team is ranked and one barely scraped in to a bowl game. Further, given the competitive nature of college football, I bet 50% of all college teams are disappointed to be at the bowl they're at. If those teams had won one more game, they might be at X bowl instead of this one, or so the reasoning goes.



Though I don't understand how was Fresno an inferior opponent--I believe their only losses on the year were to respectable opponents--Wisconsin, Boise State, Nevada, Cincinnati. Wyoming was the team lucky to be there--if anything, Fresno State was another example of unmotivated.

Mingjai wrote:

Of course most the MWC wins will be chalked up to inferior opponents (Fresno) or unmotivated teams (OSU, Cal).

The same could be said for almost any bowl win by any team. Because of conference tie-ins, bowls tend to be very inefficient at matching teams--usually one team is ranked and one barely scraped in to a bowl game. Further, given the competitive nature of college football, I bet 50% of all college teams are disappointed to be at the bowl they're at. If those teams had won one more game, they might be at X bowl instead of this one, or so the reasoning goes.



Though I don't understand how was Fresno an inferior opponent--I believe their only losses on the year were to respectable opponents--Wisconsin, Boise State, Nevada, Cincinnati. Wyoming was the team lucky to be there--if anything, Fresno State was another example of unmotivated.

Exactly my point. But the other conferences get passes for their crappy bowl opponents.



Who did Fresno beat that turned out to be good? AND, if a MWC team beat them, they have to be crap, right? :sulk:

declocoug wrote:

declocoug wrote:
Of course most the MWC wins will be chalked up to inferior opponents (Fresno) or unmotivated teams (OSU, Cal).

The same could be said for almost any bowl win by any team. Because of conference tie-ins, bowls tend to be very inefficient at matching teams--usually one team is ranked and one barely scraped in to a bowl game. Further, given the competitive nature of college football, I bet 50% of all college teams are disappointed to be at the bowl they're at. If those teams had won one more game, they might be at X bowl instead of this one, or so the reasoning goes.



Though I don't understand how was Fresno an inferior opponent--I believe their only losses on the year were to respectable opponents--Wisconsin, Boise State, Nevada, Cincinnati. Wyoming was the team lucky to be there--if anything, Fresno State was another example of unmotivated.

Exactly my point. But the other conferences get passes for their crappy bowl opponents.

I don't know if that's true.



I live in Big Ten country, and I know that any time a Big Ten team beats an SEC team in a bowl (there are two with SEC-Big Ten tie-ins), it's because:



(a) the SEC team was unmotivated or overlooked the opponent (as would have been the case if Northwestern beat Auburn yesterday)



or



(b) the weather or some other act of God (as is the case with Penn State beating LSU).



It's because apparently all college football fans know that SEC teams are faster, more athletic, and better coached than Big Ten teams, not to mention that the SEC teams have a virtual home field advantage in bowls played in the South.



It might be hard to understand, but despite the hype the Big Ten gets (which I think comes from the tradition of the conference plus the amount of journalists from Big Ten schools), the conference still has a chip on its shoulder when it comes to the speed and athleticism of the SEC, the Big XII, and USC. I've heard the unmotivated excuse used for the Rose Bowl yesterday because apparently Oregon is a faster team than OSU, though I'm not buying it.

Nice! 3rd time the MWC has won the bowl challenge cup in the past 6 years.