So i guess this where we stand for this upcoming season:

Orange-Sugar-Fiesta-Rose Bowl--Champion

Gator/Sun-- 2nd place vs ACC

Meineke---- 3rd place vs ACC

Birmingham--- vs SEC

St Pete---- vs CUSA

Toronto --- vs MAC

So 5 bowls for 8 teams (since ND is in picture) So three teams would be bowl less in worse case.

So tell why we are letting Notre Dame eat off our table?

We won't have to worry about that this year. I bet the fat man has another bad team in him.

I also think that the Big East is positioning itself for a better bowl slot. This year was just trading bowls and adding a new Florida bowl. Then, when the bowl contracts come up the Big East will have much better leverage then they did last time.

Sounds like the International Bowl could get the 4th place team or Notre Dame under the new lineup. That would make that game much more attractive. Rutgers in 2007 and Cincinnati 2006 made the International Bowl. This will be year three of the bowl and Big East is 2-0 vs the MAC in those games. Wonder if the MAC will move their #2 into the International bowl to set up a better matchup and put this game higher in the Bowl pecking order. Same with CUSA moving their #2 in St Pete.

That is correct, Tex bowl was #4, with them out of the way. International bowl moves up to #4 vs MAC #3. BE said in there press release that 5&6 would be placed in Bir & St Pete for best matchup.

Actualy I think Toronto-Bham and St Pete wil be more on location. No way that USF gets Toronto if they finsish 4rth. They would go St Pete or Bham. Is more about location.
Toronto Bowl will always be more for the northern teams: UConn,Rutgers,Syracuse, Pitt
Bham Bowl will be more for USF,Cincy, Louisville, West Virginia.

St Pete will be more attractive to any BE team because of its Florida location. This is the bowl that BE should have pushed for an SEC-BE matchup.

I think the sec would have had the option of either papa or st. pete.

templefootballfan Wrote:That is correct, Tex bowl was #4, with them out of the way. International bowl moves up to #4 vs MAC #3. BE said in there press release that 5&6 would be placed in Bir & St Pete for best matchup.

Well that's news to us because UC got the 4th place bowl, the Birmingham Bowl. If it were as simple as bowl rankings then Cincinnati would have gone to the Sun, Gator or Tire Bowl last year. If the Texas Bowl were #4 then Cincinnati would have gone to it last year. You keep complaining about the Big East losing the Texas Bowl templefootballfan, if the bowl were so important why wasn't the Big East allowed to have a member in it last year? The #20 team in the country was available and the Texas Bowl didn't take them. The International Bowl is no the 4th place bowl.

The SEC never was never able to provide the bowl elgible #9 team to the Houston Bowl that it was supposed to. My guess is Birmingham Bowl is mostly SBC/BE matchup.

Tallgrass Wrote:The SEC never was never able to provide the bowl elgible #9 team to the Houston Bowl that it was supposed to. My guess is Birmingham Bowl is mostly SBC/BE matchup.

The SEC had 9th team last year. The Texas Bowl is 8th in the Big 12's pecking order so you better hope you at least get a Sun Belt team and stop worrying about the Big East.

again, the sec had 10 and 9 teams eligible the last 2 years, the only 2 that allowed 1AA wins to count. They are expecting mnimum of 9 from now on with even more 1AA on the schedules. Cincy wasn't picked by the texas bowl because it was not the BE turn in the rotation last year.

Exactly TIGER. It's amazing the templefan is complaining about the Big East dropping the Texas Bowl. Cincinnati was ranked #20 in the country and in the Top 4 in the Big East and the Texas Bowl didn't pick us. And you're wondering why the Big East traded away a "valuable" bowl like that?

CatsClaw Wrote:

Tallgrass Wrote:The SEC never was never able to provide the bowl elgible #9 team to the Houston Bowl that it was supposed to. My guess is Birmingham Bowl is mostly SBC/BE matchup.

The SEC had 9th team last year. The Texas Bowl is 8th in the Big 12's pecking order so you better hope you at least get a Sun Belt team and stop worrying about the Big East.

I see in another post that SEC is scheduling I-AA team to become bowl elgible so I was wrong to say SEC won't have bowl elgible #9 team. The Texas Bowl should also do okay with Houston U's 30,000 fans and UTEP brought 20,000. Tulsa U brought 15,000 to Liberty so should do well at Texas Bowl. The geography just makes this an impossible geographic bowl for BE. I have always said that and I also have always said that, with USF sitting there, that a BE bowl in Florida is much better for BE than continue to play in Texas Bowl.

The tighter geography and a new broadcast partner could make the Texas Bowl something like the Liberty:
http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=297366

Tallgrass Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:

Tallgrass Wrote:The SEC never was never able to provide the bowl elgible #9 team to the Houston Bowl that it was supposed to. My guess is Birmingham Bowl is mostly SBC/BE matchup.

The SEC had 9th team last year. The Texas Bowl is 8th in the Big 12's pecking order so you better hope you at least get a Sun Belt team and stop worrying about the Big East.

I see in another post that SEC is scheduling I-AA team to become bowl elgible so I was wrong to say SEC won't have bowl elgible #9 team. The Texas Bowl should also do okay with Houston U's 30,000 fans and UTEP brought 20,000. Tulsa U brought 15,000 to Liberty so should do well at Texas Bowl. The geography just makes this an impossible geographic bowl for BE. I have always said that and I also have always said that, with USF sitting there, that a BE bowl in Florida is much better for BE than continue to play in Texas Bowl.

The tighter geography and a new broadcast partner could make the Texas Bowl something like the Liberty:
http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=297366

I agree, both teams made out like bandits in this deal, just watch. I actually think that C-USA is sitting pretty right now with the Texas Bowl and the Liberty Bowl. The Liberty Bowl is one of the best non-BCS bowls out there along with bowls like the Gator, Sun and Cotton Bowl. I still think that C-USA is in much better shape then MWC, and that C-USA just needs one of the schools to rise to Top 25, preferably Top 20, status, and then have at least one other school receiving votes. If C-USA can do that then the MWC would have nothing on C-USA. The only advantage that the MWC has is that they have ranked teams. C-USA almost had that with UCF and another school that slips my mind, maybe Tulsa.

The problem that CUSA will laways have that the MWC doesnt have is that any CUSA team that becomes a consistent top 25 would probably be taken by BE unless is a west CUSA team. That is not really possible to happen with MWC because Pac10 is prety stable

Valid point. CUSA could easily loose Memphis, UCF, ECU and Southern Miss to a new all-sports Big East Conference that will be called something else. And this could happen in 2009.

Nothing happens in 2009. at the soonest it will go down in 2013. I would love to see the above happen. 12 team all sports.. keeps BCS, adds liberty and championship game.. 2 mil for a NBE 3 vs SEC #6. and another 3 to 5 mil for the champ game..

The BE football schools "get out of jail free" cards expire in 2010. So 2009 is only time this can happen without costing the current football schools big bucks. So, if, it does not happen in 2009 when the BCS contract is written, its not going to happen at all.

agreed