Bowl games are not always representative

[eagle76 1]

D-1 football teams are at an extreme disadvantage when it comes to bowl games and how they perform versun the other divisions in the ncaa. We have to go thru 5 or 6 or even 7 weeks of not playing before we get to play a one game showdown with our opponent. Most coaches have mixed feelings about off-weeks during the season - it's good to get a rest and get players healthy but it screws with your timing and momentum. Now what happens when you get 5-7 weeks off. It's easy to see in bowl games how one team can come out flat and the other team on fire (ref last year's supposed mnc). We all knew Okla was not that good of a team but that game in no way reflected the true differences between the two teams. Usc was no where that good of a team but that is what the nation saw. During the season, the players get into a routine and focus on their studies and game planning "one" week at a time. Now the players have their focus diverted to Thanksgiving, finals, going home for a visit, Christmas, holiday eating, and getting back into practice mode.

Bowl games have too many distractions and practice schedules have to be modified to fit the host bowl's media hype and events. This is a fun time for the young men but it is hard to really judge the true ability of a team after all these extraneous activities and layoff.

I too am concerned about this year's bowl game with UW. We were on such a roll the last 4 weeks of the season and now we have to sit back and wait. What will happen on New Year's Day is anybodies guess. Our momentum has been broken - can we get it back. Football is a game of timing and momentum and it's hard to tell which team will come out looking like there was no layoff. Just one or two plays can completely disrupt an entire game and shift a win to an ugly loss.

I really enjoy watching the bowls but I realize that what I see may not always be representative of what the outcome may have been if the two teams had played under usual circumstances.