That bowl game might as well have been called the “Alabama doesn’t care about this” Bowl. Even had they won that game 80-0, it wouldn’t have changed anything. They wouldn’t have just replaced Arizona State before tomorrow’s game.
ESPN makes a ton of money off of the SEC. They don't care. I'm old enough to remember how controversial it was when they first started airing live major sports. This is why.
SEC network not showing scheduled repeat of Alabama-Michigan. At least 2nd time change made after humiliating loss-- didn't show scheduled repeat of Oklahoma-Navy. Seems like more evidence of ES(ec)PN bias or thin-skinnedness of Sankey and crew?
Non-playoff bowls are not representative of how strong (or weak) teams were in the regular season. Players sit out to avoid injury before the NFL draft or because they want a better NIL deal via the Transfer Portal. Using a non-playoff bowl to justify a prejudicial opinion lacks credibility.
If Bama would have won that game, believe me, they would not be saying "this is not representative." Please....they'd be crying from the top of that elephant "You see...we should have been in the playoff!"
Bowls seem to only matter when you win, but are irrelevant when you lose.
I’m not sure how important they’ve been for quite some time. The minute we went to the BCS and later the 4 team playoff, the bowls became less important. The bowls are still fun though.
I mean, the 2 coaches in this SouthCarolina Illinois game were about to fight midfield!
Comments
Bowls seem to only matter when you win, but are irrelevant when you lose.
I mean, the 2 coaches in this SouthCarolina Illinois game were about to fight midfield!
Also, TTUN was the team that actually sat players… Bama was playing all their draft eligible players…
Sounds a lot like post game excuse making!