I'm thinking Cal has a decent shot of ending up 6-6, though 7-5 is a much more difficult proposition with Ore St now looking good even with a backup QB.

Question is whether a 6-6 team will make a bowl game from the P12? We have 7 bowl ties in, and the p12 has not been able to send a team to the NM bowl due to not enough teams eligible and the P12 getting two teams in the BCS.

This year, getting two teams to the BCS seems likely again, but not 100% for sure. P12 also has done much better OOC this year, so there will be more eligible teams IMO. I don't see any scenario where any of the current top 6 teams (Oregon, OSU, Stanford, UCLA, ASU, USC) fail to become bowl eligible, so there's 1 or 2 slots left for the rest. WSU and Colorado are not going anywhere, and it doesn't look like Utah is either.... so Arizona, Cal and UW seem to be fighting it out for those last slots and Cal by far has the greatest challenge getting to 6-6 (and obviously more 7-5).

The Az vs UW game could be really important for each of those team's edibility - more so for Az since UW finishes with the murderers row of Utah, CU and WSU. Cal - UW is also big for the marginal bowl race. I do think that one of these teams could pass UCLA on the totem pole (especially if UCLA loses to AZ), but I'm thinking it's going to be again hard for the P12 to fulfill all their bowl tie-ins.

Seems rather silly talking about whether Cal can get to a bowl at 6-6... let's not get too far ahead of ourselves now... maybe better for a discussion after the Big Game. The extra practice time is still nice, but the #7 New Mexico Bowl is a really crapper since it's two weeks ahead of the #6 Hunger Bowl. That's two weeks less practice and also at a time that impacts finals.

Bears at ATT in december? One can dream right?:sarc:

6-6 means we finish 5-4 in conference. That virtually guarantees that we go bowling. There won't be more than 7 teams in conference w 5-4 record or better.

ColoradoBear1;841977988 said:

---

I'm thinking Cal has a decent shot of ending up 6-6, though 7-5 is a much more difficult proposition with Ore St now looking good even with a backup QB.

Question is whether a 6-6 team will make a bowl game from the P12? We have 7 bowl ties in, and the p12 has not been able to send a team to the NM bowl due to not enough teams eligible and the P12 getting two teams in the BCS.

This year, getting two teams to the BCS seems likely again, but not 100% for sure. P12 also has done much better OOC this year, so there will be more eligible teams IMO. I don't see any scenario where any of the current top 6 teams (Oregon, OSU, Stanford, UCLA, ASU, USC) fail to become bowl eligible, so there's 1 or 2 slots left for the rest. WSU and Colorado are not going anywhere, and it doesn't look like Utah is either.... so Arizona, Cal and UW seem to be fighting it out for those last slots and Cal by far has the greatest challenge getting to 6-6 (and obviously more 7-5).

The Az vs UW game could be really important for each of those team's edibility - more so for Az since UW finishes with the murderers row of Utah, CU and WSU. Cal - UW is also big for the marginal bowl race. I do think that one of these teams could pass UCLA on the totem pole (especially if UCLA loses to AZ), but I'm thinking it's going to be again hard for the P12 to fulfill all their bowl tie-ins.

Seems rather silly talking about whether Cal can get to a bowl at 6-6... let's not get too far ahead of ourselves now... maybe better for a discussion after the Big Game. The extra practice time is still nice, but the #7 New Mexico Bowl is a really crapper since it's two weeks ahead of the #6 Hunger Bowl. That's two weeks less practice and also at a time that impacts finals.

Bears at ATT in december? One can dream right?:sarc:

---

If the Bears get to 6-6, they will go to a P12 bowl. Remember, Cal was 1-2 OOC, worse than any team not named Colorado. 6-6 for Cal is 5-4 in conference, which should put them ahead of all other 6-6 teams and some 7-5 teams (teams like UCLA and Arizona can get to 7-5 by going 4-5 in conference). If we get to 6-6, I think we go to Vegas or El Paso.

There's a great chicken place in Alburquerque

hanky1;841978010 said:

---

6-6 means we finish 5-4 in conference. That virtually guarantees that we go bowling. There won't be more than 7 teams in conference w 5-4 record or better.

---

Good point that I hadn't considered... but the caveat is that 5-4 might break a tie with other 6-6 teams, but it would not let a 6-6 team jump a 7-5 team.

Looking at the remaining schedules, there is some chance that UW and Az could both finish 7-5 (some may say it's slim, but Cal at 6-6 is no guarantee to say the least), so they would get the nod over Cal even if their conference records were worse. What makes this unlikely is Az's remaining schedule and I think that the easiest way for Az to go 7-5 is to beat UCLA. UCLA has a tough schedule too, so if they lose to the likes of Az, they could drop to 6-6 since USC, Stanford and ASU are far from easy wins.

ColoradoBear1;841978024 said:

---

Good point that I hadn't considered... but the caveat is that 5-4 might break a tie with other 6-6 teams, but it would not let a 6-6 team jump a 7-5 team.

---

I don't think this is the case. My understanding is that bowls can reach a mutually agreed-upon trade, but in isolation must choose participants based on conference pecking order, which looks at conference record first for bowl-eligible teams.

Yes of course it gets us to a bowl. The record doesn't matter in conference. If you get to 6 wins you're in. The bowl tie ins within the Pac12 are not that the #4 bowl has to take the #4 team; rather its that they get to pick their team fourth or after the 3 bowls in front of them pick. Of course USUALLY it follows that order, but remember that the bowls want sellouts and the Chamber of Commerce wants to sell hotel rooms.

If the Holiday Bowl thought a last place Cal (with 6 wins) was their best chance to sellout and book the most rooms, Cal would get picked before a ranked Stanfraud. Or if the SF Nut Bowl had Cal the last 3 years in a row and were due to be left with Cal they may swap choices with the Vegas game for future considerations.

Also, think about all those years when the Pac hasn't filled spots and the WAC has gotten them instead. Some other conferences and games will not fulfill their tie ins, and eligible teams from a major conference will be very attractive.

6 wins gets Cal to a game.

But does Cal get to 6 wins?

Call me old fashion or a Cal Fan in recovery but I say, one game at a time lads, one game at a time.

NeverOddOrEven;841978043 said:

---

I don't think this is the case. My understanding is that bowls can reach a mutually agreed-upon trade, but in isolation must choose participants based on conference pecking order, which looks at conference record first for bowl-eligible teams.

---

I don't think so. My understanding is that, assuming no team goes to the NC game, only the Rose is locked in to taking any one team. The next bowl has next choice, and so on. This "next choice" procedure may mean that teams don't get placed in order of finish.

There is also the general rule that a bowl can only select a 6-6 team for an at-large berth after all winning teams have been accounted for. I don't know if this rule applies to conference affilliated bowl games.

This was how it was done in previous years. If it changed for this year, then my understanding is out of date.

1. If we go 6-6 who cares whether or not we go to a Bowl gameand play Western Kentucky.

2. 6-6 is really 5-6 if u don't count the win over that JC program which is getting tiring.

3. 6-6 and going to a bowl makes i seem like there is some success to a season that every Cal fan knows is simply not the case.

NeverOddOrEven;841978043 said:

---

I don't think this is the case. My understanding is that bowls can reach a mutually agreed-upon trade, but in isolation must choose participants based on conference pecking order, which looks at conference record first for bowl-eligible teams.

---

6-6 vs 7-5 is different because the NCAA bowl eligibility rules state that a team with a winning record (ie 7-5) must be accommodated before 6-6 teams.

I'm not certain on if P12 bowls still have to chose by conference record (yes this was the case for the P12 under hansen before the CCG), or if they can pick and choose however they see fit. Other conferences have long done away with the selection based only on record.

Either way, it's irrelevant to the 6-6 issue because under NCAA rules, the 7-5 team gets precedence over 6-6. So if we are down to one last spot, and either AZ or UW are 7-5, a 6-6 team is a no go.

If the Pac 12 gets 2 teams in the BCS it frees up one more slot... but for instance would a 3 loss USC still be sought after (or even elegible) if they lose to the Ducks twice? Oregon St has a good chance because they don't play the Trojans and the Rose would grab em if the ducks go NCG. But would the sugar or orange take them? probably not. Plus for Cal to go 6-6, we need to beat 1 of Oregon, Oregon St, and Stanford, so that team would have it's BCS chances hurt anyway.

It's also possible that a 6-6 pac 12 team could be selected for a non contracted bowl, too. I think UCLA went to a bowl in DC a few years ago since they were the last possible 6-6 team out there.

ColoradoBear1;841978053 said:

---

6-6 vs 7-5 is different because the NCAA bowl eligibility rules state that a team with a winning record (ie 7-5) must be accommodated before 6-6 teams.

I'm not certain on if P12 bowls still have to chose by conference record (yes this was the case for the P12 under hansen before the CCG), or if they can pick and choose however they see fit. Other conferences have long done away with the selection based only on record.

Either way, it's irrelevant to the 6-6 issue because under NCAA rules, the 7-5 team gets precedence over 6-6. So if we are down to one last spot, and either AZ or UW are 7-5, a 6-6 team is a no go.

If the Pac 12 gets 2 teams in the BCS it frees up one more slot... but for instance would a 3 loss USC still be sought after (or even elegible) if they lose to the Ducks twice? Oregon St has a good chance because they don't play the Trojans and the Rose would grab em if the ducks go NCG. But would the sugar or orange take them? probably not. Plus for Cal to go 6-6, we need to beat 1 of Oregon, Oregon St, and Stanford, so that team would have it's BCS chances hurt anyway.

It's also possible that a 6-6 pac 12 team could be selected for a non contracted bowl, too. I think UCLA went to a bowl in DC a few years ago since they were the last possible 6-6 team out there.

---

The 7-5 over 6-6 precedence rule was eliminated in 2010. There has been an example each year of a team being left out of a bowl since. In 2010-2011, 8-4 Temple was left out, and in 2011-2012, 7-5 Western Kentucky was left out. In fact, in 2011-2012, 6-7 UCLA got in over 7-5 Western Kentucky, although they went to a conference affiliated bowl game.

There is a new NCAA rule in 2012, which only applies to non-conference affiliated slots:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8228544/ncaa-new-bowl-game-tiebreakers-include-fcs-wins-5-7-teams

"Under the new measure, if there are not enough bowl-eligible teams, or if a bowl cannot be filled by its conference affiliations, the open spots would be filled through a six-tier tiebreaking process."

NeverOddOrEven;841978157 said:

---

The 7-5 over 6-6 precedence rule was eliminated in 2010. There has been an example each year of a team being left out of a bowl since.

---

thanks for the correction, you are right... love the new definition of a deserving team.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D113.pdf

Quote:

---

18.7.2.1 Contest Status. A contest shall serve the purpose of providing a national contest between
deserving teams. A “deserving team” shall be defined as one that has won a number of games against Football
Bowl Subdivision opponents that is equal to or greater than the number of its overall losses. Tie games do not
count in determining a team’s won-lost record. Further, when forfeiture of a regular-season football victory is
required by the Committee on Infractions or a conference, or is self-imposed by an institution as a result of a
violation of NCAA rules, neither of the competing institutions may count that contest in satisfying the defini-tion of a “deserving team.”(Revised: 10/18/89, 10/12/93, 4/20/99, 12/15/06, 4/29/10 effective 8/1/10, 7/30/10,
10/27/11 effective 4/1/12)

---

Now whether the p12 bowls can select out of order is a different matter that depends on P12 rules. But it since a 6-6 team with a better conference record can be selected over a 7-5 team, that would only 'help' Cal. But at that point, the bowls and season have so much suck to them that I don't think any of us would get worked up if Cal was passed over. But I think even as badly as the season started, a potential bowl game gives the team something they can aspire to get to... though IMO at this juncture, winning the games Cal would need to win to get there would be a far greater of an accomplishment that reaching the actual bowl.

beelzebear;841978046 said:

---

Call me old fashion or a Cal Fan in recovery but I say, one game at a time lads, one game at a time.

---

There was a time when Big Game was our bowl game. The next game is always the biggest game on the schedule, but it was never more true than this week.

beelzebear;841978046 said:

---

Call me old fashion or a Cal Fan in recovery but I say, one game at a time lads, one game at a time.

---

That's no way for Red Of Tooth And Claw monsters to post, esp damning when spot on.

#Stop Making Sense.

GB54;841978022 said:

---

There's a great chicken place in Alburquerque

---

HAHAHAHA...Heisenberg!

What a great show.

Cal ending the regular season at 6-6 is a long shot. We'd have to win 3 of our last 5 games. If by some miracle we should beat Stanfurd, we'd still have to defeat Washington and Utah; it's possible we could defeat one of them, but I can't see us beating both. And forget about Oregon and Oregon State; those are virtually certain to be losses.

waltwa;841978049 said:

---

1. If we go 6-6 who cares whether or not we go to a Bowl gameand play Western Kentucky.

2. 6-6 is really 5-6 if u don't count the win over that JC program which is getting tiring.

3. 6-6 and going to a bowl makes i seem like there is some success to a season that every Cal fan knows is simply not the case.

---

Whether every Cal fan agrees with you or not, I would say the players at 6-6 would care about going to a bowl - and they're the ones working hard everyday to try and make it happen.

For Cal to finish 6-6, they will have to beat at least 1 ranked team and will have had to clean up many of the issues that plagued this team in the first 5 games.

To the players, I would say, finishing 5-2 after their 1-4 start would be considered a successul finish - regardless of what a bunch of internet posters say.

I'm more *****d that JT makes 2+ mil and would consider 6-6 good. That's an embarrassment. I don't care if Nike pays most of it. He is raping some entity and does not sit easy with me. Bowl at 6-6?? Maybe good for the players, but not for what our hopes were for

This thread is a joke. TypiCal.

Is this the rule for bowl eligibility?

18.7.2.1 Contest Status. A contest shall serve the purpose of providing a national contest between
deserving teams. A “deserving team” shall be defined as one that has won a number of games against Football
Bowl Subdivision opponents that is equal to or greater than the number of its overall losses. Tie games do not
count in determining a team’s won-lost record. Further, when forfeiture of a regular-season football victory is
required by the Committee on Infractions or a conference, or is self-imposed by an institution as a result of a
violation of NCAA rules, neither of the competing institutions may count that contest in satisfying the defini-tion of a “deserving team.”(Revised: 10/18/89, 10/12/93, 4/20/99, 12/15/06, 4/29/10 effective 8/1/10, 7/30/10,
10/27/11 effective 4/1/12)

If so, how are eligible at 6-6 as we would only be 5-6 against FBS schools? Southern Utah is FCS.

BearlyAggie;841978045 said:

---

6 wins gets Cal to a game.

But does Cal get to 6 wins?

---

This last question is the one that matters. Where are the three additional wins? Utah appears the most likely. Some of you will say Stanford is no. 2. Well, we will be sure about six wins or not after Saturday. A win means we can believe the season turned around enough to avoid a truly awful season. A loss means even the most optimistic person knows the season really did end after the Nevada game. Amazingly, this year is just like 1980. Stanfurd game makes or breaks the season.

WhipItOutJoe;841978532 said:

---

Is this the rule for bowl eligibility?



If so, how are eligible at 6-6 as we would only be 5-6 against FBS schools? Southern Utah is FCS.

---

I didn't post it because I was lazy, but there is an exemption for one FCS win, if that school has met some kind of scholarship minimums for the previous 2 years. I'm guessing most FCS schools are fine, but when a team is changing from DII to DI, they might not have enough scholarship players to meet the exemption.

At first I wasn't convinced Cal had a "decent" chance of making a bowl, but after running "my" numbers I calculate Cal has a 1/3 chance of making a bowl. I'd be happy to run somebody else's probability assignments if you want.

Assuming the following probabilities of victory in our remaining games -

vs. Stanford .45
vs. Utah .8
vs. UW .5
vs. Oregon .1
vs. OSU .25


Our Chances of

2 or More Wins: .73
*3 or More Wins: .33
4 or More Wins: .07
5 Wins : .005

waltwa;841978049 said:

---

1. If we go 6-6 who cares whether or not we go to a Bowl gameand play Western Kentucky.

2. 6-6 is really 5-6 if u don't count the win over that JC program which is getting tiring.

3. 6-6 and going to a bowl makes i seem like there is some success to a season that every Cal fan knows is simply not the case.

---

this

Even with the one FCS game, Cal has played one of the toughest schedules in the country. We should be a lock for a bowl game if we get to 6-6.