We really blew the Egg Bowl.

[SyonaraStanz]

What's most disappointing in all of this is the Egg Bowl. Had we won, OM would be banned from a bowl for the next 2 years, meaning Juniors and Seniors could transfer. However, Mullen did what he does best and shat the bed, basically saving the OM program from any real punishment. That was Mullen's parting gift to the program that bent his *** over the 3 of the past 4 years. Even more glad he's gone today.

 

[Philly Dawg]

You are not correctly understanding how the bowl ban works. They self imposed a ban for this year that would have stood even if they'd gone 0-12.

 

[FlotownDawg]

Same here. The only Egg Bowl we won the past four years was the year we had a losing record. Meaning Mullen wasn't as attractive to other programs and wasn't shopping his name around as much. The three good seasons we had he was too busy trying to get any other job to focus on the Egg Bowl and he got his *** kicked. Glad that **** is over with.

 

[SLUdog]

I agree with you....

our team still had the ability to win that game. If we are only -1 in turnovers, then we win. Mullen's disappointing lack of ability to finish a good seasons makes me miss him less.

 

[SyonaraStanz]

You are not correctly understanding how the bowl ban works. They self imposed a ban for this year that would have stood even if they'd gone 0-12.

I believe the NCAA waited to announce penalties after the Egg Bowl, so they could enforce a 2 year bowl ban. So had we won, I believe the NCAA would have said "you cannot penalize yourself of something you're not even eligible for, so we're adding two more years."

I could be wrong, but doubtful.

 

[KeyserSoze1999]

Mullen already was packing things up at his house for moving to Gainesville. He was not emotionally invested in the Egg Bowl, this explains why he had no reaction to the cheap shots / taunts / Metcalf fake peeing in the end zone etc.

View attachment 9012

 

[Dawgzilla]

Same here. The only Egg Bowl we won the past four years was the year we had a losing record. Meaning Mullen wasn't as attractive to other programs and wasn't shopping his name around as much. The three good seasons we had he was too busy trying to get any other job to focus on the Egg Bowl and he got his *** kicked. Glad that **** is over with.

I know this stat was already posted here, but Mullen was 5-0 in Egg Bowls when State entered the game with 7 or fewer wins. He was 0-4 when State had 8 or more wins. So, basically, UMiss ruined every one of Mullen's good seasons.

 

[Dawgzilla]

I believe the NCAA waited to announce penalties after the Egg Bowl, so they could enforce a 2 year bowl ban. So had we won, I believe the NCAA would have said "you cannot penalize yourself of something you're not even eligible for, so we're adding two more years."

I could be wrong, but doubtful.

You're wrong

 

[L4Dawg]

That's not how it works. Ole Miss had self imposed the bowl ban prior to the start of the season. Bowl bans are always for a specific year. They aren't dependent on whether you qualify or not.

 

[SyonaraStanz]

So the governing body that decides the punishment could not have added two years instead of one? Granted that's more believable today, after seeing the actual punishment. But why would the NCAA think OM deserves a 2 year ban and only tack one to the self-imposed, once it would be clear the self-imposed wasn't even a punishment, due to bowl eligibility?

I'm speculating, but it's easily believable.

 

[Baddmann]

They had already self-imposed a Bowl ban for this year. Even if they had won every game they would not have gone to a bowl. The ncaa added another year to the "self imposed" one.

 

[Dawgzilla]

So the governing body that decides the punishment could not have added two years instead of one? Granted that's more believable today, after seeing the actual punishment. But why would the NCAA think OM deserves a 2 year ban and only tack one to the self-imposed, once it would be clear the self-imposed wasn't even a punishment, due to bowl eligibility?

I'm speculating, but it's easily believable.

I'm sure they could have added a third year of bowl ban, but that actually would have violated the penalty matrix. They assessed this as Level 1-Standard violation, which calls for a 1 or 2 year bowl ban. I sincerely hope the COI did not wait to see how the season played out before deciding how severe the penalties should be...that violates all standards of fairness.

A bowl ban is a bowl ban, regardless of the team's record. The Rebel players have known all year that there would be no postseason play for them, no matter what. I don't know how much players are motivated by bowl games, but they had no opportunity. They also were not eligible to play in the conference championship game, although they weren't even close to good enough, so it didn't matter. And as much as I'm sure they enjoyed beating MSU last week, it would have been a whole lot sweeter if it had also launched them into a bowl game. They were punished, whether they won 6 games or not.