Seems just about impossible since we have go 3-0 and hope there are a few spots open for 5-7 teams that dont get gobbled up by FBS newbies JMU and RichRod. But here's the APR rankings. 5-7 teams are awarded bowls by APR rankings. Anyone care to handicap our chances given this list?
Pitt's chances for a bowl at 5-7
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
I'm not sure it matters that much if they would be offered at 5-7. Given they opted out of potentially going to what was on offer at the end of the 6-5 record Covid year; it's questionable that they would consider whatever was offered to them at 5-7 to be worth the expense of going. I think they might only go if somehow the ACC didn't have enough bowl eligible teams to fill their bowl slots and were contractually obligated to send someone.
After the first 9 games, do any of you really believe they can win 3 straight?
Unless they can somehow get to 8 wins, which we all know they can't, they don't deserve a bowl. 8 wins should be the minimum, and eliminate half of the so-called "bowls" out there. So now we're letting professional college football players play in a game when they haven't done anything to earn one?
That's all it amounts to when you win less than 8 games and you're in a "bowl" game...it's a participation bowl. And professional college players don't deserve to be in any game if they haven't done squat to earn it.
The landscape of college athletics has changed now with these players all being professionals. If they don't do their jobs and win, they don't go to bowl games. Instead, they should be cut from the rosters and recruited over. They asked for it and now accountability is in play. It's different than it's ever been and the term "college-athlete" doesn't exist now.
It's just a TV show, I'd rather watch 5-7 Pitt than watch the playoff.
I think most of us agree that if Pitt got a December exhibition, we'd prefer to watch that over any other bowl.
Why is anyone even discussing something like this when the football season is over for Pitt, for all intents and purposes? A new hoops season is starting tonight and that might actually be a very positive thing for Pitt.
In addition to Jax State and JMU, there are 11 teams ahead of Pitt right now when you exclude the teams that have already qualified. One of Wisconsin and Minnesota will definitely get to 6 wins as they play each other. Cincy likely wont get to 5. Auburn should beat New Mexico State and get to 6 wins. Iowa State over BYU will get them to 6. So that likely leaves Northwestern, Wake, Boise State, Rice, Miss State, UCF and then Pitt in the pecking order?
T1 Northwestern (4-5)
T1 Wisconsin (5-4; plays northwestern/minn)
6 Cincinnati (2-7; Houston; WVU; Kansas)
T8 Minnesota (5-4; plays wisconsin)
T8 Wake Forest (4-5; ncst; cuse; ND)
T13 Boise State (4-5)
T15 Iowa State (5-4; BYU, KSU; UT)
T15 Rice (4-5)
T19 Auburn (5-4; NM State)
T19 Mississippi State
22 UCF
T23 Pitt
T23 South Carolina (would need to beat Clemson or Kentucky)
T1 Northwestern (4-5)
T1 Wisconsin (5-4; plays northwestern/minn)
6 Cincinnati (2-7; Houston; WVU; Kansas)
T8 Minnesota (5-4; plays wisconsin)
T8 Wake Forest (4-5; ncst; cuse; ND)
T13 Boise State (4-5)
T15 Iowa State (5-4; BYU, KSU; UT)
T15 Rice (4-5)
T19 Auburn (5-4; NM State)
T19 Mississippi State
22 UCF
T23 Pitt
T23 South Carolina (would need to beat Clemson or Kentucky)
82 teams will go to bowl games. So the real question is, how many teams can get to 6-6 right now. Then, as those teams lose their 7th and are ranked below Pitt in APR, we cross them off the list. Right now, 113 of 133 teams can still reach 6 wins. Well, kinda. I didnt look at head to heads to see which teams have to knock each other out. Pitt needs 32 of those teams to reach 7 losses and then have the highest APR.
Last edited:
This week the Athletic projected that there would be five more spots than teams. So the two newbies and three others made their projections. The lowest APR team of those three was Rice.
Which means that if there are three disasters of some sort in the next three weeks and we get credit for three wins in a row there is actually a decent chance we will be offered a spot.
Which means that if there are three disasters of some sort in the next three weeks and we get credit for three wins in a row there is actually a decent chance we will be offered a spot.
If that ends up being true and we go 5-7, you wonder if maybe some of those 5-7 teams, perhaps going through a coaching change/mass transfers opt out.
I have the perfect marketing slogan. "Can you smell the Lume Bowl?" Lets get to 5-7!
So what does it cost logistically for a team to go to a bowl? Some of these bowl payouts are just a few hundred thousand. I know bowl revenues are split, but would it even be worth it since it would be most likely a net loss? Not to mention all of the players who think their going in the 1st round or transferring to bama sitting out.
Pitt would lose more money going to a bowl game than staying at home because their ACC bowl payout would be relatively the same regardless. That said, Pitt would not and should not turn down an extra game and practices for financial reasons.
That's a stupid rule too. Everyone should be able to practice whether they go to a bowl or not.
The extra few weeks of practice a bowl invitation would ensure are vital to the program’s future.
"Teams that don't reach bowl games are limited to mandatory weight training, conditioning and review of game film between the end of the regular season and Jan. 1. They get a maximum of eight hours per week for those activities, including no more than two hours per week of film viewing."
The ACC gives every school that makes a bowl game a stipend to cover expenses.
Of course the schools routinely spend more than that. Not because they have to. Because they can.
Colorado will be double digit underdogs in their final 3 games and still needs to win one of them to get to 5 wins.
Pitt is favored over Syracuse this week and the other two games will probably be within a FG spread either way.
Probably a pretty good shot neither of these teams make it to 5 wins.
