Bowl Projections

#27      
Now that we are officially bowl bound, I'm looking to dive into the "Bowl Hierarchy" given the new CFP format since that appears to take the bowls I would typically associate with a very good (or even good) season such that the Rose, Fiesta, and Sugar Bowls. The remainder now being the Duke's Mayo, Citrus, Reliaquest, Music City, Pinstripe, etc. most of which would be close to falling into the "You Won 6 Games" games bucket, except for maybe the first couple listed. Just curious if there are any thoughts on what a recalibrated Bowl hierarchy would look like?
Technically, based on the pick order, it is Citrus, Reliaquest, Duke's Mayo (Vegas in odd-numbered years), Music City, Pinstripe, Guaranteed Rate, and Quick Lane. The first 4 are usually fielding solid teams (7-win teams more often than not, occasionally an 8 or 6-win). I think the only thing that really changes is we may never send a team to the Quick Lane Bowl again. It's been our extra bowl for a while so we don't always have a team to send (haven't set a 6-win team since 2019). We need 7 bowl-eligible teams besides playoff teams to send a team there, and with 3+ teams probably going to the CFP more years than not, I don't know how likely that is. The "official" hierarchy is different than the perceived hierarchy tho obviously. I don't think the CFP directly hurts the perceived quality. Citrus will still be the top with Reliaquest close behind, Music City and Mayo being respectable but not great, and the rest being meh.

A thing that can change the perceived hierarchy tho is that USC, Washinton, UCLA, and Oregon aren't competing for the same bowl bids as us for now. If they're eligible and not in the CFP, they still get picked to go to their PAC-12 bowl tie-ins. So depending on how the standings sort themselves out beyond the CFP teams, the hierarchy can fluctuate from year to year just depending on where those West Coast teams end up in the standings. If they take over the top without sending a team to the CFP, it can really downgrade the quality of the team we sent to some of our bigger bowls. Similarly, tho, it could potentially do the opposite at really boost up the quality of some of our lower-end bowls.
 
#29      
If it's a 12 seed or the Citrus Bowl, I would take the Citrus Bowl.

Going to another school for a game is not my ideal scenario. Now my minds starts to wander. Hypothetically, it could be a trip to Columbus to play O$U. How does this work, does Illinois get a ticket allocation, does the band make the trip? You win and then you go to Pasadena against the #1 team. How many fans would just wait to see if you win the first matchup? Frankly, a trip to Columbus in December does not feel like much of a reward. Imagine if we were seeded 5-8 and the outrage from another school that would have to come to Champaign in December.

Just to clarify, if I am attending in person, I would rather go to the Citrus Bowl. I obviously understand that the playoffs are a bigger stage.

I would not really want to travel to an away game at another college in December.
 
#32      

Music City BowlNashvilleDec. 30Illinois vs. Ole Miss

Citrus Bowl (Dec. 31): Illinois vs. Alabama

ReliaQuest BowlTampaDec. 31Illinois vs. Texas A&M
 
#36      
^^ yes, IL football is 0-6 all-time vs teams in the SEC at the time the game was played.

There was a 1913 victory over Kentucky but that came 19 years before the SEC was formed. And 7 victories over Missouri in their Big 8/Big 12 days. Go Illini
 
Back