Citrus Bowl or Bust for Me

Submitted by Ziff72 on November 30th, 2011 at 6:19 PM

On the way home Valenti and Foster were doing the usual baiting Michigan fans into calling up since there are no ratings in talking MSU football.

The premise was would you root for MSU to help Mich get to the BCS?  I don't care about that but based on all the diaries posted on here and the callers it does appear that a lot of fans do want to go to the BCS.  

My question is why?  Bowls hold very little interest for me.   The only bowls that I find compelling are against top teams.   I would much rather test ourselves against Arkansas than play Houston.   If the BCS bid meant we were guaranteed to play Oklahoma, Oklahoma or Stanford than I would be fine with it, but Houston?  Who wants that?

If you are not going to the game the only thing that matters about the bowl game is bragging rights and entertainment.  Michigan does not need publicity.  Come on it's Michigan!  So I don't but that argument to go to the BCS

Let's look at the other factors.

Gametime- Advantage Citrus.   1:00 start day off work vs a midnight finish on a work night

Opponent- Advantage Citrus.   Arkansas vs Houston  Not even close.  Plus a win gives us Seee Ceee bragging rights and continues our historical domination of them.

So to those of you that want to go to the Sugar Bowl can you explain why?




November 30th, 2011 at 6:40 PM ^

1. BCS bowls, in the minds of most, usually consist of the nation's best teams/programs.

    2. We want to be one of the nation's best teams/programs.


        3. It is beneficial to our cause when we compete in BCS bowls.


November 30th, 2011 at 7:11 PM ^

Look at Stanford last season.  They did not win a Pac-10 title.  They did not win a MNC.  However, they went to the Orange Bowl and beat Virginia Tech.  They were crowned Orange Bowl champions, got a neat trophy and had some cool shirts & hats, and talk of Stanford's great season dominated ESPN for a day or two. 

If Michigan goes to the Sugar Bowl and wins, that's what we'll get.  Why would we not want that?  And no, we will not get the same thing by winning the credit card bowl.



November 30th, 2011 at 7:21 PM ^

"We" get none of that.  The only tangible thing you get is Mark May telling you Michigan is good.

Personally that means nothing to me, but I give you credit for coming up with something tangible among the 50 threads.

My sleep argument was blasted away so we're down to this argument

Better opponent vs Mark May greeting card.  Fight!


November 30th, 2011 at 7:29 PM ^

I think you are overlooking the tangibility of Sugar Bowl hats & shirts.  Nobody wants Capitol One Bowl hats & shirts--besides, you can get those free with a credit card application.


November 30th, 2011 at 7:17 PM ^

I think he stated the "cause." It's to be considered one of the best teams in the country. That path is paved with BCS bowls regardless of the opponent. Are people going to fault Oklahoma for playing Connecticut in the Fiesta Bowl in 5-10 years time? No, they will simply be acknowledged for having one more BCS win in the recent past, explaining why they are still among the nation's elite programs.


November 30th, 2011 at 6:41 PM ^

tell those slappies you'd rather see wisconsin crush their dirty players into the turf so their immoral pipsqueak of a coach has to watch the last chance he's going to have at a conference championship turn into michigan going to a better bowl than his gang of lowlife criminals.


November 30th, 2011 at 6:42 PM ^

Winning a BCS game would be huge considering Michigan hasn't won one since the 1999 season.  That is way too long.  I want to get that monkey off our backs even if it does come against Houston.  Michigan has played in the Capitol Bowl game enough.


November 30th, 2011 at 6:51 PM ^

Actually, the capital one people are pretty excited about Nebraska since they obviously never had Nebraska. It is quite possible for UM to slide to the Outback bowl or lower if they get squeezed out of the top 14.

The Sugar Bowl people are salivating over having UM though, so I expect them to get their way one way or the other.

Doc Brown

November 30th, 2011 at 6:56 PM ^

I am actually hoping we go to the capital one bowl for a few reasons. One, I have family in Charleston, SC I can visit on the way down to Orlando. Secondly, tickets are cheaper for the capital one bowl. Finally, I really want to go to the Wizarding World of Harry Potter at Universal Studios. I heard it is insane. 

willis j

November 30th, 2011 at 7:03 PM ^

history lesson, I thought the BCS startd the year after!!! Regardless, I still think a BCS birth means you had a really good season if not great season. 

Monocle Smile

November 30th, 2011 at 7:11 PM ^

Going to a BCS establishes a reputation. We've probably convinced ourselves otherwise, but I wouldn't be surprised if we went undefeated this year and were still denied entry into the MNC due to the past three years and the constant blow J that the BCS gives the SEC and apparently the Big 12.

We're much more likely to be considered for the MNC if we have a recent BCS appearance on our record...especially a BCS win.

Oh, wait...Ziff wrote this. That explains why it's borderline depressing and/or nonsensical.


November 30th, 2011 at 7:37 PM ^

Ignoring the insults you are submitting a theory that requires a little thought.

After a little thought I say it's probably bs.

Oklahoma St was in if they went undefeated.  Not really any BCS history or tradition

Auburn was garbage before last year.


If you want to establish a rep because you think we need one to get to the MNC game it is much more beneficial to beat Arkansas.

If we go undefeated next year and don't get in to the MNC because we played in the Citrus I'd well.... it wouldn't happen.   




November 30th, 2011 at 7:41 PM ^

On the other hand, if Oklahoma State wins Saturday then they and Alabama will  both finish with one loss.  I believe OK State will have more wins against ranked opponents, and OK State will have won their conference--nontheless, Alabama will go to the BCS title game.  Could that be because Alabama is an established power, whereas OK State is a relative upstart?


November 30th, 2011 at 8:29 PM ^

It's probably because Alabama's loss was against the #1 team in OT and OK ST lost to an unranked 6-6 scrub team.  

I see your point, but we're not Ok St and the differnce between beating a SEC team and winning the Sugar Bowl is small.


November 30th, 2011 at 9:17 PM ^

The people who vote in the polls change their logic every year.  For instance, another argument you could make this season is that Alabama lost at home, whereas Oklahoma State lost on the road.  Irrelevant?  Well, in 1998 Florida State and Ohio State each had one loss.  Ohio State's loss was to MSU by 4 points.  FSU lost 24-7 to NC State, but the voters sent FSU to the national championship game anyway on the argument that Ohio State lost at home, while FSU lost on the road.

I'm not necessarily buying into this theory that winning a BCS game this year will give us more cred for the future, but the "system" (for lack of a better word) is so screwy that you never know what will help you or hurt you.


November 30th, 2011 at 7:14 PM ^

I agree with Ziff. I don't think it's that big a deal in the grand scheme. The priority is great weather for these players (especially the seniors), a good bowl (which we're guaranteed), and getting more practice time and game experience.  Also giving me something to look forward to. I'll be fired up whereever they play, so all this BCS stuff is just more BCS stuff from where I sit.

I also think most of the recruits don't remember the days when the big 5 or 6 New Years Day bowls were the big thing. The difference between the Sugar and the Citrus is likely nothing to them.

Blue boy johnson

November 30th, 2011 at 7:23 PM ^

I find the match up with Houston intriguing, more intriguing than Arkansas. On offense, I would be interested to see what Denard, Fitz and Co. could do against Houston. I don't think points would be a problem, plus I think both Fitz and Denard could get 200 yards rushing in the game.

Defensively, I would love to see what Mattison could put together to stop Case Keenum and the vaunted Houston passing attack. I think the blitz packages would be exciting to watch. Over under on sacks would be 7. It would be kind of like the '98 Rose Bowl vs Ryan Leaf and Washington State. Bring it on puppy dog!


November 30th, 2011 at 7:27 PM ^

How bout also adding to the narrative that MICHIGAN IS BACK! I want that reputation again(or even a piece of it) where teams come into the Big House scared and down two TDs mentally. I know a win over Houston won't get us back to that point, but starting to rack up BCS wins and having 8-0 home seasons can't hurt.


December 1st, 2011 at 12:09 PM ^

I agree, and a narrative like this is at least partially driven by the media -- which obviously sees BCS bowls as more prestigious and more meaningful. Fair or not, the media narrative can significantly influence public perception (and the perception of recruits, casual fans, etc). A BCS bowl win would help shape the narrative favorably heading into the offseason, for Michigan and for the Big Ten.

The Barwis Effect

November 30th, 2011 at 7:49 PM ^

Ziff72?  Not so much.

If the Citrus, er Capital One Bowl was so great, it wouldn't be shoehorned into the world of second tier bowls.  No less than three other bowl games will be played concurrently with the Capital One Bowl.

The Sugar Bowl gets a football free timeslot in prime time which means that the eyes of the college football world will be upon U-M.


November 30th, 2011 at 7:49 PM ^

I'd love to go to a BCS game.  HOWEVA, I'm not gonna sit there and hope Sparty wins in order to help us.  I'd rather go to a shittier bowl than root for MSU to win.  I hope Montee Ball rushes for 200 and at least 3 TDs.  Irrational, I know.  It's just me. 


November 30th, 2011 at 7:57 PM ^

Well, from what I gather, it doesn't matter to UM which team wins the B1G Championship Game--just that the best thing that could happen is for the game not to be close.  So go ahead and root for Wisconsin to win by 30.

That being said, I find your sentiment quite ironic.  Usually it is the hallmark of a Spartan to prefer that his opponent fail rather than his own team succeed.

marco dane

November 30th, 2011 at 7:54 PM ^

Michigan is bowling,why should the competition be question? This isn't Houston five years ago,but a passing team with a aresenal.

I'll take the bcs berth and the 1st of January commercials this year. Its been since 2007,I'm hungry!



November 30th, 2011 at 8:07 PM ^

The Citrus is perceived as a lesser bowl, and a win is a win.  Houston would be a tough team, but I have a feeling UM would be able to shut them down given enough time.  And for these seniors, who have nothing to show except a meh win over Florida and a bad loss to Miss St. in their two bowl appearances, a BCS game to cap off a career would be fantastic; traveling to central Florida doesn't hold a candle to it.


November 30th, 2011 at 8:24 PM ^

Whoa Whoa Whoa. I agree with wanting to play in the BCS game, but don't call the bowl win over Florida a meh win. That win was bookended by two Florida National Championships. That was a good Florida team. Not to mention that it was also one of the most entertaining games to watch in the last 5 years. I love that game.


November 30th, 2011 at 8:52 PM ^

Thanks for the kind words.

As a bonus I wasn't accused of being Pro RR and Anti Hoke in over 100 responses so I guess I'm making progress.


P.S.  You still didn't give a tangible reason you just made fun of the thread which is kinda my point.  No one knows why they want to go to the BCS game, they just do. 


November 30th, 2011 at 9:02 PM ^

  1. Biggest stage (look at the ratings, press coverage, ect.).
  2. Undefeated opponent, instead of one who got embarrassed last week.
  3. Recruiting advantages (a ten win Michigan team goes to the BCS, a ten win MSU goes to the Capitol One and gets crushed).
  4. Far, far greater prestige and bowl name recognition.
  5. Prime time with no other bowls that day.
  6. Haven't been to the Sugar Bowl since 1984, it's a unique experience.


November 30th, 2011 at 9:06 PM ^

I've stated my point in other posts, but basically:

One is a BCS bowl, the other isn't. This might not matter to you, but it does to many. Perception is reality, and people perceive BCS bowls as being more prestigious, which reflects on the teams playing in them.

Money and prestige for the conference. The Big Ten will benefit from us playing in a BCS bowl. If we lose money on tickets, I doubt we lose any more than we would in the Citrus Bowl.

Time. The Citrus Bowl will be when I'm at work, and will overlap with other bowls. Anyone watching the Gator Bowl or Outback Bowl won't be able to watch ours, same with anyone who has to work or go to school on that Monday. The Sugar Bowl is on primetime and it's the only football game on that day.

If we miss out on the BCS, we aren't guaranteed the Citrus. We might get the Gator Bowl instead.

Making a BCS bowl is a major accomplishment. Making the Citrus Bowl is fine, but being in the Sugar Bowl means you are one of ten teams playing in BCS bowls this year, and that's a big deal. When Hoke talks to recruits about this season, he won't say that we played Houston or Arkansas in a bowl, he'll say we played in the Sugar Bowl or Citrus Bowl. One sounds far better.


December 1st, 2011 at 10:25 AM ^

Making the BCS is not an accomplishment.  It means you were selected by some group of wealthy people who don't know jack shit about football to come to their game because they know Michigan will travel well and get good ratings which will help them in negotiating their next tv deal.

Michigan accomplished 10-2 and 2nd place in the Legends Division.  What some suits select from there is not the fault of the players.

As for everyones points.  If you are going to the game it's a no brainer.

I still don't see if you are sitting in your living room watching the game like 99% will be doing how does going to the Sugar Bowl vs the Cap 1 Bowl change your enjoyment level.

What I am hearing from everyone is that they would rather watch essentially

Mich vs San Diego St on 8:00 Saturday game on ABC

instead of

Mich vs Nebraska on at noon on ESPN

and the reason being on at 8:00 on ABC we get an exclusive chance to sell our brand to the country?   Don't buy it.

A lot of you guys have brought up the recruits.   I don't really see it but I don't know you may be right.  If recruits are looking at where the program is at I'm pretty sure Hoke shows them we were 10-2 last year and that's good enough.  We're Michigan 110,000, winged helmets,  most wins all time, ya know all that jazz.


December 1st, 2011 at 10:36 AM ^

Why do you consider Arkansas such a marquee opponent? Arkansas has very little football tradition (Arkansas is historically an MSU level team, except MSU has more MNC's and has actually won the Big Ten before) and has never won the SEC. I'm not claiming that Houston is any better, but we're not talking about a great or even good football program.

And as for the Sugar Bowl increasing viewing pleasure, do you take joy in going to the Rose Bowl? The Sugar is on the same level; we'd be replacing the SEC champion in the game. Finishing second in our division is not a recruiting tool, BCS bowls are, which is most likely a big reason Brady Hoke wants to go.