A little early for bowl talk, no?
Is it just me, or is it a little early to be speculating about which bowl game we might accept? It seems nearly everyone, myself included, was counting Illinois as a victory. We saw how that turned out. I'd caution against counting Purdue as one, too. RichRod was right when he said Purdue is a better team than people think. They are more experienced than us, don't feature any walk-ons, as far as I know, and they beat OSU for christ's sake.
I'm holding my bowl speculation until and unless we show that we can beat Purdue and can HOLD ON TO THE GODDAMN BALL. Just sayin...
November 4th, 2009 at 2:21 PM ^
You need to be eligable in order to be invited and you need to be invited in order to refuse. All that is far from a certainty at this point.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:21 PM ^
It's too early to really think about this or that but I don't really see anything wrong with some mild specualtion on this insanity of Pat Caputo or Rivals, if that is what you are referring to. Of course we have to win 1 more game and how the team has looked for half a month nothing is guaranteed but sometimes you just gotta speculate and what if or the MGoBoard would be stale.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:24 PM ^
this week's game is the 10th out of 12 games right? I think now is the time where a bowl prediction has teeth rather than when we were 4-0 and all signs pointed to capital one.
November 4th, 2009 at 4:46 PM ^
You do realize we're ranked last in conference offense and defense, are playing two ranked teams, and are also playing a team whose short passing attack matches up well against our defense?
We are definitely not guaranteed a bowl; it's probably a bit over 50% at this point, but not much more than that.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:25 PM ^
It's never too early to talk bowls. I mean, WHAT IF Florida or Alabama lost before the SEC championship game? THEN the chaos begins!
Signed,
November 4th, 2009 at 2:29 PM ^
If people can speculate about the coach of Michigan getting fired after less than two years of his contract, then I can speculate at which bowl game I'm going to get blind drunk in December.
GO BLEU.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:49 PM ^
Clearly, no one here has seen the power of material on Mgoblog (e.g., basketball Liveblogs, Brian not thinking it necessary to write "HOLD ONTO THE GODDAMN BALL" in a particular preview) to JINX us and control our destiny.
(Knocking on wood...)
November 4th, 2009 at 2:41 PM ^
Personally, I enjoy discussing potential bowl games because this means that we are likely good enough to play in one. Similary, I enjoy discussing potential NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament seeds, but for the majority of the Amaker/Ellerbe years, I was unable to do so without risking potential institutionalization.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:48 PM ^
your avatar was the single brightest moment of this year.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:04 PM ^
It's not even 4:00 yet.
November 4th, 2009 at 3:07 PM ^
But it's five o'clock somewhere.
November 4th, 2009 at 4:00 PM ^
Maybe, but it's directly related to the next game on our schedule, so maybe not?
November 4th, 2009 at 7:28 PM ^
In the "careful what you ask for" department, I would love to see Valenti's little radio tantrum about a UM/MSU rematch at Ford Field become a reality. My understanding, though, is that they have to take the MAC champ. And, of course, there is that trifling matter of MSU having to win two of the next three to become eligible.
Anyway, assuming that UM can become UM again on Saturday and put Purdue in their place, Forcier will be a lot healthier by bowl time, the game would be indoors, and the team that lost in the regular season usually wins a bowl rematch. It would really be easier on the eyes and ears this offseason if Sparty lost their only reason to brag. And Ford Field would fill their crappy little bowl, too.
All great reasons for Valenti's rant to become reality.
November 4th, 2009 at 7:37 PM ^
bowls Saturday at 3:30 after we Boiler up.