Playing the Academies are always fun. ...and now that Rich Ellerson (Warrior LB in the 70's, and DC in the late 80's) is Army's new HC, a 4-game series has been signed.

The series starts with Hawaii travelling to NY next year.

Hawaii plays Navy this season against former Warrior QB Ken Niumatalolo.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/articl...2/90519037

(05-20-2009 05:08 PM)jediwarrior Wrote:  Playing the Academies are always fun. ...and now that Rich Ellerson (Warrior LB in the 70's, and DC in the late 80's) is Army's new HC, a 4-game series has been signed.

The series starts with Hawaii travelling to NY next year.

Hawaii plays Navy this season against former Warrior QB Ken Niumatalolo.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/articl...2/90519037

These are "natural" series. Hawaii is jam packed with the military, all branches but mostly Army & Navy. Gives those guys a chance to see their teams play. Hats off to the Hawaii adm for lining this up.

I have noticed in the recent articles on Navy's future bowl plans that they do not have a deal signed for 2012 yet but are said to be working on it. My guess is that the Midshipmen will sign a deal to play in the Hawaii Bowl in 2012. The fact that Army has not been good for a long time, and Navy keeps signing a bunch of one-year deals, is throwing a little monkey wrench into a few of the current bowl negotiations.

FUTURE NAVY BOWL DEALS
2009 - Texas Bowl
2010 - Poinsettia Bowl
2011 - Eaglebank Bowl
2012 - (under negotiation)
2013 - Armed Forces Bowl

I originally thought Army and Navy would simply sign a deal to switch on and off between the Eaglebank Bowl and another game, like the Humanitarian Bowl or Poinsettia Bowl, every year but it looks like they want to travel around even more. A four-year rotation of Poinsettia, Eaglebank, Hawaii, and Armed Forces would also work but I assume most bowls are hesitant to sign Army because they might not qualify.

(05-22-2009 06:15 PM)Krocker Krapp Wrote:  I have noticed in the recent articles on Navy's future bowl plans that they do not have a deal signed for 2012 yet but are said to be working on it. My guess is that the Midshipmen will sign a deal to play in the Hawaii Bowl in 2012. The fact that Army has not been good for a long time, and Navy keeps signing a bunch of one-year deals, is throwing a little monkey wrench into a few of the current bowl negotiations.

FUTURE NAVY BOWL DEALS
2009 - Texas Bowl
2010 - Poinsettia Bowl
2011 - Eaglebank Bowl
2012 - (under negotiation)
2013 - Armed Forces Bowl

I originally thought Army and Navy would simply sign a deal to switch on and off between the Eaglebank Bowl and another game, like the Humanitarian Bowl or Poinsettia Bowl, every year but it looks like they want to travel around even more. A four-year rotation of Poinsettia, Eaglebank, Hawaii, and Armed Forces would also work but I assume most bowls are hesitant to sign Army because they might not qualify.

Playing Navy in the Bowl would be sweet. But I'm hoping that the Sheraton Hawaii Bowl can move up and secure the #4 or #5 Pac-10 team when Bowl contracts start to expire.

Navy would be a good contingency though.

I think I figured out what might happen if Navy signs with the Hawaii Bowl for 2012. The games involved should also sign Army, but only for one year each to avoid the risk of being burned by ineligibility, and their deals can simply mirror those of Navy. It would also involve getting the Pac-10 to split the Poinsettia & Hawaii every year and having CUSA split the Armed Forces & Eaglebank every year.

POTENTIAL SWITCH GUESS
2010 - Pac-10 in Hawaii / Navy in Poinsettia / CUSA in Armed Forces / Army in Eaglebank
2011 - Pac-10 in Hawaii / Navy in Eaglebank / CUSA in Armed Forces / Army in Poinsettia
2012 - Pac-10 in Poinsettia / Navy in Hawaii / CUSA in Eaglebank / Army in Armed Forces
2013 - Pac-10 in Poinsettia / Navy in Armed Forces / CUSA in Eaglebank / Army in Hawaii

The issue again, though, is whether any of these bowls besides the Eaglebank are willing to sign a deal with Army and risk having to scramble for an at-large like the Poinsettia did last year. Maybe they will feel that they are bound to pull it together eventually and a one-year deal is not all that risky when considering the reward. Getting four bowls outside the BCS to cooperate, however, is hard.

(05-23-2009 12:35 AM)Krocker Krapp Wrote:  I think I figured out what might happen if Navy signs with the Hawaii Bowl for 2012. The games involved should also sign Army, but only for one year each to avoid the risk of being burned by ineligibility, and their deals can simply mirror those of Navy. It would also involve getting the Pac-10 to split the Poinsettia & Hawaii every year and having CUSA split the Armed Forces & Eaglebank every year.

POTENTIAL SWITCH GUESS
2010 - Pac-10 in Hawaii / Navy in Poinsettia / CUSA in Armed Forces / Army in Eaglebank
2011 - Pac-10 in Hawaii / Navy in Eaglebank / CUSA in Armed Forces / Army in Poinsettia
2012 - Pac-10 in Poinsettia / Navy in Hawaii / CUSA in Eaglebank / Army in Armed Forces
2013 - Pac-10 in Poinsettia / Navy in Armed Forces / CUSA in Eaglebank / Army in Hawaii

The issue again, though, is whether any of these bowls besides the Eaglebank are willing to sign a deal with Army and risk having to scramble for an at-large like the Poinsettia did last year. Maybe they will feel that they are bound to pull it together eventually and a one-year deal is not all that risky when considering the reward. Getting four bowls outside the BCS to cooperate, however, is hard.

I wonder what ESPN Regional is thinking? Of course, Hawaii wants to Pac-10 all day, all night, and twice on Sundays. The Sheraton wants the Pac-10 because of the visitors the game will bring to their Hotel.

But how's ESPN Regional viewing this thing? Are they happy with getting the #6 or #7 Pac-10 team every year? Or are they willing to move up the chain to land #5 or #4...?

Sorry, but any bowl game in Hawai'i is going to be low on the totem pole for any BCS conference due to travel considerations. ESPN Regional doesn't much care because the game provides programming for the worldwide leader. The payout in the game is low, schools doen't have to sell too many tickets but often come back from Hawai'i in the red financially.

A hybrid plan with the Poinsettia Bowl is the best the Hawaii Bowl can hope for from the Pac-10. Just look at the fact that they had to cancel this year's deal due to the fact that the Pac-10 will almost never qualify seven bowl teams. With the Poinsettia Bowl wanting to work Army and Navy into the picture, however, the Hawaii Bowl has an opening, since the Pac-10 will need an alternate sixth spot in those seasons, if they are also willing to work with Army and Navy in alternate years. I have revised my suggestion about the four particular bowls after noting that Army will play a regular season game at Hawaii in 2013.

REVISED POTENTIAL FOUR-BOWL ROTATION
2010 - Pac-10 in Hawaii / Navy in Poinsettia / Army in Armed Forces / CUSA in Eaglebank
2011 - Pac-10 in Poinsettia / Navy in Eaglebank / Army in Hawaii / CUSA in Armed Forces
2012 - Pac-10 in Poinsettia / Navy in Hawaii / Army in Eaglebank / CUSA in Armed Forces
2013 - Pac-10 in Hawaii / Navy in Armed Forces / Army in Poinsettia / CUSA in Eaglebank

The ideal rotation would flip-flop the agreements for 2012 and 2013 but, since Navy has already signed the Armed Forces Bowl contract for the latter year, it may be too late for that now. Of course all of the parties could mutually agree to make such a change but who knows if they actually might do so. Perhaps the 2014 through 2017 bowl contracts will make that necessary correction. Going with my suggestion significantly lowers the risk of a game getting burned too much by signing up Army or Navy for a year in which the teams ends up not being bowl eligible. Now we wait to see if common sense prevails with them.

Looks like the Pac-10 wants to alter their scheduling to ensure 7 Pac-10 teams become Bowl eligible. What do you think about this Krocker?

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/pac10/0-9-76/...uling.html

(05-30-2009 11:00 AM)jediwarrior Wrote:  Looks like the Pac-10 wants to alter their scheduling to ensure 7 Pac-10 teams become Bowl eligible. What do you think about this Krocker?

I heard that the other day and strongly dislike it. The Pac-10 and Big East are the only BCS autobid leagues where all of the members play each other and I would like to see it stay that way. On the other hand, I understand the desire by some coaches to try to schedule almost surefire wins, thus making it easier for their teams to become bowl eligible. Either way, I think the Pac-10 would still end up with a split Poinsettia/Hawaii arrangement, like I posted above. They would then have to look somewhere else, perhaps Boise, for their seventh bowl deal.