p2

11/29/2008 9:37:26 PM

Quote :

"I thought the Chick-Fil-A Bowl was technically for the #2 ACC team"

3rd place team. Gator bowl is for #2 place team. We weren't 2nd place when we went to the gator bowl with Phil--we were tied for 4th, at least I think we were tied, I know we were 4th

11/29/2008 9:38:34 PM

Yea, I use to be a Wake fan, they're infamous for blowing it at the end...just look at the last 2 years they played us, hopefully they loose so we can guarantee a bowl

11/29/2008 9:38:51 PM

^^ I thought they made the Chick-Fil-A the #2 bowl because the ACC championship was in Jacksonville and the loser would basically go back there for the bowl if the Gator was the #2 bowl.

11/29/2008 9:48:54 PM

^ur right

11/29/2008 9:53:31 PM

maybe it has changed, but the point is it doesn't matter. Bowls choose who they want if the team is within a certain number of games.

11/29/2008 9:55:22 PM

we'll be going to DC it's pretty apparent. We travel as well as anyone, finished strong and it's a great storyline for the bowl

being their first year, it's good for them to have NCSU play our coach's alma mater in Navy... from what I've heard that bowl has been VERY interested in us these past couple of games

11/29/2008 10:00:18 PM

Realistically, if we have a worse record, I would be surprised if they choose us for a bowl

11/29/2008 10:02:15 PM

lmao at Wake not even being able to fill 1/4 of their stadium for Senior Day

11/29/2008 10:04:08 PM

^^we've done it before

I would be suprised if we dont jump someone

[Edited on November 29, 2008 at 10:05 PM. Reason : asd]

11/29/2008 10:04:32 PM

^I don't think that's true.

Some of the posters on PP are saying that there are NCAA rules that claim that for an at-large bid all 7-5 teams must be taken before 6-6 teams. I guess this is fair for smaller teams getting skipped over for the "less-deserving" BCS schools but kind of screws those with tough schedules(such as us).

I think we need Wake to lose for us to get Nashville, so I think everyone affiliated with that bowl and every NC State fan should be pulling for Vandy right now, haha.

11/29/2008 10:06:56 PM

^yea all 7 win teams must be taken in the conference tie-in bowls, so if wake hangs on then we can not go to an acc bowl

but if wake loses then we could jump all the way up to the chick-fil-a bowl, it wouldnt happen but we could

but i dont know if clemson is considered a 6 or 7 win team since 2 wins were against FCS schools

11/29/2008 10:13:03 PM

Clemson is a 6 win team I would wager, since only 6 of their wins count for eligibility.

11/29/2008 10:14:22 PM

^ Correct.

11/29/2008 10:16:47 PM

I fucking hate Wake right now...It's bullshit that we beat them and UNC recently and we might still not go to a bowl

11/29/2008 10:19:24 PM

^^ok so were not automatically locked out of the acc bowls then, right?

even though clemson might still get the 9th bid over us

[Edited on November 29, 2008 at 10:19 PM. Reason : .]

11/29/2008 10:19:24 PM

Can't a team be picked before another team as long as they are only 1 win ahead within the tournament bowls? I know all 7 win teams have to be picked before 6 win teams for the at large bids, but I seem to remember someone saying that in the tournament bowls they could picked within one win. So NCSU could be picked before a 7 win team, but not before a 8 win team.

11/29/2008 10:29:28 PM

^We could jump a 7 win team if as long as they get to go to the lower bowl. So we could get a better bowl than a 7-5 team, but we can't leave one out.


[Edited on November 29, 2008 at 10:37 PM. Reason : x]

11/29/2008 10:35:05 PM

the 1 win rule comes into play with the acc tie in bowls. we can't go to a bowl over a team more than 1 game ahead of us. but as has been said, every team is 5-3 or worse so we can jump anyone but the acc champion theoretically.

the 7-5 rule involves atlarge bids. if we dont get selected to an acc bowl, we'll have to wait for all the countries 7-5 teams before we can get an AT-LARGE bowl.

11/29/2008 10:40:58 PM

so let me get this straight, there are 9 ACC bowl tie ins, correct?

and eight 7-5 teams... so that leaves Clemson & us to fight for the 9th spot?

then whoever is left hopes to steal another conference's bid?

11/29/2008 10:42:50 PM

Even though Clemson is considered to have 6 wins, they still have only 5 loses, therefore a winning record. I think this means they have to take a bowl game before us. If I understand the rules correctly, we are waiting for an at-large bid at this point period. In regards to games that would eliminate other teams we may be competing with for a bowl, we had a few "wins" yesterday, but none at all today.

11/29/2008 10:43:30 PM

-funny wording in the rulebook puts Clemson ahead of us because of their "winning record"
-now that Wake won, we cannot get a bowl bid from the ACC since 9 teams have 7 wins.

SEC, PAC10, Big12 are likely to have some extra bowls. we can't be taken over a 7 win team for an at-large bowl either

[Edited on November 29, 2008 at 11:14 PM. Reason : a]

11/29/2008 10:45:05 PM

perhaps we should try to figure out if any other 7-5 schools will be left out of their conference's tie ins?

is some shit team like Akron going to steal our bowl bid?

11/29/2008 10:46:27 PM

bah i was hoping for clemson to count as a 6 win

[Edited on November 29, 2008 at 10:48 PM. Reason : .]

11/29/2008 10:47:57 PM

Quote :

"Even though Clemson is considered to have 6 wins, they still have only 5 loses, therefore a winning record. I think this means they have to take a bowl game before us. If I understand the rules correctly, we are waiting for an at-large bid at this point period"

If so, that is pretty fucked up. Basically it makes it advantageous to have a shitty OOC schedule.

11/29/2008 10:49:10 PM

read what package said

11/29/2008 10:51:59 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_bids_to_non-BCS_bowls

tie ins...

[Edited on November 29, 2008 at 10:53 PM. Reason : mmk]

11/29/2008 10:52:39 PM

^^ Same outcome though, it rewards them for playing two FCS teams.

11/29/2008 11:06:24 PM

wait.....so wake already lost to navy this year 24-17 on sept 27th - and they might get them again for a bowl game?

11/29/2008 11:07:30 PM

Ok, so lets cut the fat and speculation! After winning the last 4 games, in a convincing fashion I must say, are you all saying we are not going to a bowl???!?

11/29/2008 11:08:19 PM

there is a high possibility that we will not be going to a bowl

11/29/2008 11:10:37 PM

whoa whoa whoa whoa.

a higher possibility we won't go to an ACC TIE IN BOWL.

I still think we have a good chance of getting an at large bid somewhere. we have to figure out how many extra 7-5 teams there are floating around....

maybe we can get the Texas Bowl? Big 12 #8 vs C-USA #3/4 (Big 12 only has 7 eligible teams)

11/29/2008 11:12:55 PM

i think we'll end up in a bowl...i just think it'll be shitty and far away...

11/29/2008 11:13:07 PM

there is definitely a possibility at this moment we may get left out of a bowl completely

11/29/2008 11:13:33 PM

It's all about the money in bowls though. Lets quit talking about records and sh#t. Who is going to make the most money??? Wake Forest??? UNC??? NC State in DC....hmmmm

11/29/2008 11:16:12 PM

^ $ does not matter. 9 teams in the ACC have a winning record and we do not. we cannot go to DC or any other ACC bowl

11/29/2008 11:16:58 PM

^^ right but they HAVE to take certain teams... regardless of money

[Edited on November 29, 2008 at 11:17 PM. Reason : xtra carrot]

11/29/2008 11:17:17 PM

why the fuck did you sensor shit ?

11/29/2008 11:19:02 PM

Our OOC schedule next year should be:

McNeese State, Rutgers, UConn, and Notre Dame.

That way we can go 3-5 in the ACC and still get a better bowl than the 4-4 teams.

11/29/2008 11:20:07 PM

haha, I'm accustom to writing emails at work too much. So what about the fact that we got that bogus invitation after beating UNC...does that go out the window now?

11/29/2008 11:20:08 PM

wtf?

11/29/2008 11:22:47 PM

we never got an invitation, the DC bowl was just very interested in us playing in it. Now that Clemson and Wake both won we can't and it's moot.

11/29/2008 11:24:08 PM

Quote :

"i think we'll end up in a bowl...i just think it'll be shitty and far away"

11/29/2008 11:27:51 PM

Screw it...I'll start a bowl in fucking WakeMed soccer park sponsored by Trojan condoms, invite App State so we can be them and shut them up about the "best program" shit and we can make some money.

11/29/2008 11:30:37 PM

that sounds like an awesome idea

11/29/2008 11:31:57 PM

lol, ok, maybe you guys can help me out, but after some prelim research....

Conferences:
ACC - 9 tie ins, all accounted for
Big 10 - 7 tie ins, all accounted for
Big 12 - 8 tie ins, Texas Bowl may be open with only 7 bowl eligible teams
Big East - 6 tie ins, all accounted for
C-USA - 6 tie ins, all accounted for
MAC - 3 tie ins, all accounted for ** WILL steal an at large bid with 4 teams at 7-5 or better
Mtn West - 4 tie ins, all accounted for
Pac 10 - 7 tie ins? 5 eligible teams right now, I guess we should root for ASU (5-6) to lose to Arizona next week.
SEC - 8 tie ins, all accounted for
Sun Belt - 1 tie in, all accounted for - Arkansas State could steal an at large
WAC - 4 tie ins, all accounted for - Hawaii could steal an at large

maybe help me with the specifics... I guess if certain teams (multiples from one conf) get a BCS bid it could mix things up, plus Notre Dame will probably go somewhere

Standings on ESPN:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/standings


[Edited on November 29, 2008 at 11:58 PM. Reason : thx ssclark & Luda]

11/29/2008 11:44:16 PM

Yeah we need to be pulling against Arizona State, Arkansas State, and apparently Hawaii though I think if they win today they're in above us.

This really is some NC State shit.

11/29/2008 11:51:21 PM

HAHA WE GOT FUCKED


LAWLERS if ASU fucks us out of a bowl bid ...... you'll all see the irony shortly, he really did curse us didnt he.

someone post the ghost picture

Quote :

"MAC - 3 tie ins, all accounted for ** might steal an at large bid with 4 teams at 7-5 or bett"

and will steal. over us atleast, a 7-5 d1 team must be picked over us no questions.

[Edited on November 29, 2008 at 11:56 PM. Reason : .]

11/29/2008 11:53:43 PM

^^ yea, you appear to be correct sir

11/29/2008 11:56:34 PM

^^can you post that just a couple more times....I do not think anyone saw it the first 100 times....

11/30/2008 12:00:09 AM