-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
What MWC bowls are not "crap bowl"?
- Thread starter r12
- Start date
LanderPoke
Well-known member
The one the conference champ gets is slightly, slightly less crap. AF also has the potential to get slightly less crap bowl games because of the military stuff and their “brand” and ostensible appeal. All the other MWC bowls are pure crap
WyomingAgJ
Well-known member
In my opinion all are crap except for LA bowl. I think the Mountain West has the worst bowl ties of all conferences. I hope they improve with the pac-12 going away. But the only way to not be in the crap bowl is to win the conference, or be good enough that you get farmed out to another bowl via some trades like what has happened for both Air Force and Boise State in the past
WYO_Fan_inPA
Well-known member
Well if we ever WIN the conference we won't be playing in a "crap" bowl!
The bowls that non-conference champs get invited to are always lessor..... The expansion of the bowl system means that the "bowl team" moniker means less than it did years ago. I, for one, am glad there are more. If your want to go back to when ten win Wyoming teams did not get any bowl invitation at all... Just say so.
DamThatRiver22
Well-known member
It's always amusing to me how much Wyoming fans complain about the bowls.
They're almost always interesting matchups and competitive games, and most of them are in decent locations (save for Boise, but jesus christ 9 times out of ten I'd still take the Treasure Valley over the Laramie Valley in December.)
Reminds me of everyone's meltdown here over the AZ/Barstool bowl coverage few years back...when by and large everyone else in the CFB world absolutely loved it and it got rave reviews. It was literally only the stodgy, stuffy Wyoming fanbase that had a problem with it.
What's most interesting to me, though, is that many of the same people that complain about not getting a "better" bowl are the exact same people that will defend Bohl and claim that we should be happy to be making bowls at all.
You can't have your cake and eat it, too. Want a better bowl? You need to at least win a championship. Nothing in CFB is handed to us for free.
Anyway, rant over. As much as I'd prefer championships and I've been very vocal about demanding more out of this program at this point, none of these bowls are anywhere near as terrible as people cry about...and I'll be perfectly content watching one more Wyoming football game against an OoC opponent that I probably know little about, knowing that it's at minimum good exposure for the program. This is what we've been given based on our performance; might as well enjoy it instead of crying nonstop about it.
They're almost always interesting matchups and competitive games, and most of them are in decent locations (save for Boise, but jesus christ 9 times out of ten I'd still take the Treasure Valley over the Laramie Valley in December.)
Reminds me of everyone's meltdown here over the AZ/Barstool bowl coverage few years back...when by and large everyone else in the CFB world absolutely loved it and it got rave reviews. It was literally only the stodgy, stuffy Wyoming fanbase that had a problem with it.
What's most interesting to me, though, is that many of the same people that complain about not getting a "better" bowl are the exact same people that will defend Bohl and claim that we should be happy to be making bowls at all.
You can't have your cake and eat it, too. Want a better bowl? You need to at least win a championship. Nothing in CFB is handed to us for free.
Anyway, rant over. As much as I'd prefer championships and I've been very vocal about demanding more out of this program at this point, none of these bowls are anywhere near as terrible as people cry about...and I'll be perfectly content watching one more Wyoming football game against an OoC opponent that I probably know little about, knowing that it's at minimum good exposure for the program. This is what we've been given based on our performance; might as well enjoy it instead of crying nonstop about it.
Poke in New England
Well-known member
phxpoke said:
If it isn't on cable television, it's crap. I'm not a Barstool hater either.
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
Poke in New England said:
I disagree. I am not sure catering to the nursing home crowd is really helpful for building a fanbase.
Poke in New England
Well-known member
OrediggerPoke said:
Any potential fan/viewer of any age has either cable or a streaming service. The AZ bowl cannot be seen on either. It requires effort/set up that is only slightly less F'd up than watching a Hawaii game. It was a unique experience last year and I think Barstool does some cool things with the game - I also liked Dave Portnoy being willing to say that Bohl coached the game like coward. But I'm all set on going back to that bowl again.
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
Poke in New England said:
It was simple on both smart TVs or any streaming device. I doubt we get picked for the Arizona Bowl (having been last year) but the streaming aspect was far from an impediment to anyone’s access other than those folks unwilling to get with the times.
Poke in New England said:
Not to weigh in of whether the AZ bowl is any good or not but isn't this an example of trying something different? The revenue model of CFB is skewed in a way that is detrimental to Wyoming (and the MWC). I see a lot of comments saying that the MW commissioner or the Wyoming athletic director needs to think outside the box, but the $$ just are not there. I would love to see more streaming or something....anything that gives the non-big time programs some visibility that is not so destabilizing like the networks have been.
aranderson
Well-known member
Wyokie said:
The Sun Bowl I believe would be another one we could possibly get out of the merger as well.
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
LawPoke said:
No we didn’t. This is your personal bias against barstool.
