who would have thought WSU would only have 6 points and getting their butt kicked by the Gophers.
Holiday Bowl
- Thread starter scarletred
- Start date
Washington State couldn't block a middle school B team. Minnesota was getting to the QB with a 3 man rush consistently.
Last time they won exactly 9, but in 2003 they won 10.
When you throw the ball that much. It's easier to stop you.
Not shocked at all by the game. The more physical team won.
Not shocked at all by the game. The more physical team won.
But with all the suspensions I wish you would have Given us this information before kickoff.
On a related note, I just watched the very end of the game. WSU scores and goes for 2. A pass is caught right at the goal line and called no good. It goes to replay, but there is no camera angle that shows right down the goal line. If you're going to have instant replay you have to have that camera angle.
Like most bowl games, the more motivated team won. Minnesota came in with a purpose and Wazzu was just playing a glorified exhibition.
If there was one thing I would love to see changed in non CFP bowl games it would be to give the winning team a bigger portion of the bowl payout. Coaches would coach, in practices leading up to the game, for this game and not next season.
I watch as many bowl games as possible. So I am not against having these games at all. I just want both teams going all out for the win.
If there was one thing I would love to see changed in non CFP bowl games it would be to give the winning team a bigger portion of the bowl payout. Coaches would coach, in practices leading up to the game, for this game and not next season.
I watch as many bowl games as possible. So I am not against having these games at all. I just want both teams going all out for the win.
I like this idea. What do you think of the idea some are floating around now of allowing redshirts to play in bowls? I have mixed feelings about that
That would be contrary to playing to win this game. By allowing redshirted to play, you would be looking toward next year and not this year.
I could be swayed to be in favor of allowing a limited number, max 3, that could be used in case of injury. So if Armstrong and Fyfe were injured and not able to play in a bowl game, I could see the rules adjusted to allow a redshirt to play, the bowl game only, without losing the entire year.
That was the scenario I had in mind as well. That the number who could play would be capped and that they could only play if those ahead of them were injured. Otherwise I think it is a bad idea and simply turns the bowl game into an early Spring practice scrimmage
I have never liked the idea of bowls having conference ties. I wish the final poll would come out and the list of bowls in order of importance (money most likely) would pair teams by order if rank. 5v6, 7v8, 9v10, 10v11 and so on.
You didnt ask me, so you may not care, but im Against it. By allowing this you are saying these bowls are meaningless, and if they are, what coaches would risk an injury to a player for a game that doesnt matter anyway? I wouldnt. Plus the new years six bowls would be affected, youd essentially have different teams playing if the redshirts were to play (most wouldnt).
Of course I care... Ha. And I agree with what you say here. I do think there are some limited exceptions that could be allowed, but that is it.
Minnesota's defensive staff did one hellva job preparing their defense, it reminded me of when Penn St defeated Vinnie and the Canes in the Fiesta bowl for the National title.
The determining factor in the game was Leidner's accuracy in the second half throwing the ball and Leech going for it on 4th down with more than 3 minutes to go in the game. Punt, use timeouts, get the ball back. Wazzu had stopped the Minnesota run the whole game 41 rushes 150 yards.
I thought Nebraska did ok against Minnesota, they moved around well and as Olivia Newton John would say, they got physical!
Obviously the bowls were more meaningful when there were a lot fewer of them, and when there were no playoffs. I seldom watch a full game for any of the lesser bowls any more unless Nebraska is in it. For the lesser bowls I usually just check in on scores and sit down sometimes if it looks like a close finish. I don't think a bigger payoff for the winner would do anything to motivate the players. They don't get the money and they are motivated, if at all, by pride or a desire to prove themselves. And I'm not sure it would matter to the coaches either. The coaches are already very interested for the usual reasons: they have got to be developing players and schemes to win in the future if they want to keep their jobs. I guess I don't see the point of playing the redshirts for one game. They haven't been playing at that level all year, so it would be like opening day readiness for them. And if the game is a reward for the regulars, they would be losing minutes to any redshirt on the field. But I don't have any strong concern about either issue.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Breaking News Per reports, UCF DC Addison Williams is set to be NU's DBs coach- Latest: Nebraska Power
-
