(07-03-2012 01:51 PM)3601 Wrote:  

(07-03-2012 01:38 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-03-2012 01:07 PM)attackfrog Wrote:  

(07-03-2012 11:20 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that understood the ACC's place in the power structure.

What's more important to me is this confirmation that Joe Schad provided to me:

https://twitter.com/schadjoe/status/220176170363260930

This confirms what I believed to be the case before: if a bowl loses its conference champ contractual tie-in to the semifinal, that bowl will choose another team from that same conference *regardless* of where it's ranked. Therefore, if an ACC team is a top 4 team, the Orange Bowl will take a different ACC even it's an unranked team. The same would occur with respect to the Rose Bowl and Champions Bowl tie-ins. That means that any selection committee ranking requirements are *irrelevant* with respect to contractual tie-ins and there are effectively only 3 at-large spots available in the top bowls.

Frank you may be right, but I think this line of thinking is what the top-4/5 conferences are expecting. I tend to think this is not what the non-AQ's believe they have signed onto. I think the presidents have settled on a 4 team playoff, 6 BCS Bowls, and a selection committee. Given the conflicting statements and the speed with which the last presidents meeting arrived at a consensus, I tend to believe many details with resepect to acccess, the selection process, the rotation process, and division of proceeds are yet to be determinined. These moves to lock in bowls may simply be smart moves that will pay off if the model preferred by the Top-4/5 is indeed approved as the final product.

It's hard for me to believe that the non-AQs and Big East didn't see this coming, though. Jim Delany and Larry Scott couldn't have been any clearer about how the Rose Bowl needed to be purely a Big Ten/Pac-12 affair outside of its semifinal years and the SEC/Big 12 Champions Bowl was created along the same lines. Now, if there ends up being zero at-large spots among the top 6 bowls without any protection for non-AQs (or, at the very least, a completely merit-based system that applies regardless of conferences so that a #5 Boise State team gets a top bowl slot), then I think the non-AQs would rightly start squawking. Everything about protecting the 5 power conferences with guaranteed bowl slots, though, should have been expected.

We all saw it coming. How could they have not?

They saw it coming, but what could they do about it? They are outnumbered.

Th

(07-03-2012 02:10 PM)BE Tex Wrote:  

(07-03-2012 02:02 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(07-03-2012 11:47 AM)Maize Wrote:  

(07-03-2012 11:43 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  We need NBC to create a new bowl - BADLY. It will be interesting to see what comes to fruition on that front, if anything.

Or change the bowl arrangement with ND with NBC/Fed Ex and make a play for the Fiesta Bowl...very very long shot.

Who are we going to play?

Probably the MWC champion when they are ranked high enough. They made the path easier for the non-aqs to get into a major bowl.

No. They actually made it harder. Thats the purpose of the selection committee and the reason the Big East was demoted. Essentially, the spot that the Big East used to have will be taken by the Big-4/5 and the slot that the non-Aq's used to get will end up with the Big East most of the time. The actual functional access for current Non-AQ schools to the playoff and the BCS bowls has been significantly reduced.

We're void of any real leadership.

Kinda sucks.

Not much we can do. Reality s that we lack name programs that travel in large numbers which is the name of the game regarding bowl games.

(07-03-2012 02:38 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  Not much we can do. Reality s that we lack name programs that travel in large numbers which is the name of the game regarding bowl games.

That is the reality.

We all love our programs and our colleges otherwise we wouldn't be posting here. The reality is that many of our programs are in large urban areas which is good. However, large urban areas are not dedicated to the local university and most football fanatics are more interested in the local/regional NFL team which is bad.

Not to mention that large urban areas also have huge numbers of fans (alumni and non affiliated supporters) for the large regional college programs in the SEC, B1G, PAC and XII - also unfortunate.

We should work to get real leadership in the conference offices quickly, work our unique angle with NBC Sports with several kickoff times and mens basketball inventory and know we're never going to get the big money. We should strive to get much better money than the MWC, CUSA et al so we can be competitive and produce a national title game contender as many or more times as the ACC.

That's our niche.

Still unsure what happens to the champion of a league with a tie-in to one of the six bowls, if that bowl is a semifinal host and the team doesn't make the semifinals. More than likely they are an at large to another one of the games, but doesn't seem like there are guarantees, like there was in the old autobid system, unless secondary deals are struck.

Correct we need to rep a close eyes on all the details hammered outin near future.

I just don't see the appetite from the other bowls to take the ACC champ if it's not in top 12 and is someone lie Wake Forest when the OB is a semifinal.

(07-03-2012 02:58 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Still unsure what happens to the champion of a league with a tie-in to one of the six bowls, if that bowl is a semifinal host and the team doesn't make the semifinals. More than likely they are an at large to another one of the games, but doesn't seem like there are guarantees, like there was in the old autobid system, unless secondary deals are struck.

ACC #2 is in the Orange if ACC #1 is in the top 4 playoff. ACC#3 is in the Orange is ACC #1 & 2 are in the playoffs....so no at large on that side of the Orange bowl equation. Same goes for the Rose or the Big 12/SEC bowl.

Brian Murphy ‏@murphsturph
My understanding: Only three bowls will be "contracted bowls." Other three will be "access bowls."

I'm sure this was the compromise for the non-aq conferences and maybe in exchange for knowing they won't get the majority of the revenue but at least they could get to a major bowl.

(07-03-2012 02:58 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Still unsure what happens to the champion of a league with a tie-in to one of the six bowls, if that bowl is a semifinal host and the team doesn't make the semifinals. More than likely they are an at large to another one of the games, but doesn't seem like there are guarantees, like there was in the old autobid system, unless secondary deals are struck.

Read the press release from the ACC this morning regarding the Orange Bowl.

http://www.theacc.com/sports/m-footbl/sp...12aaa.html

Quote:In the years that the Orange Bowl serves as a semifinal host, the ACC Champion would then participate in one of the three host bowls that will be established as per the direction of the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee.

Now what isn't guaranteed is a second ACC spot if the ACC champion is in the playoffs in a year when the Orange Bowl is a semifinal. In that case, another at-large spot does open up for the rest of the world. That should carry through for the Rose and Champions Bowl as well, so that in any given year, there theoretically could be as few as 3 at-large spots or as many as 5.

(07-03-2012 03:04 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I just don't see the appetite from the other bowls to take the ACC champ if it's not in top 12 and is someone lie Wake Forest when the OB is a semifinal.

It seems to me that some sources say straight top 12 decided by selection committee, some say bowl tie ins, some say bowl tie ins only apply to champions----Personally I think these details have yet to be worked out. The presidents meeting was awfully short to have sorted through this level of detail. My guess is that they decided on a 4-team playoff format and a selection committee. Everythng else is still in the "to be decided" category.

The whole system is a joke.

(07-03-2012 11:50 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  it's a completely legal contractual transaction based on free market principles (which are what antitrust laws are designed to protect, NOT the concepts of "fairness" or "equality").

I still have a hard time seeing how "free market principles" apply to tax-exempt sports programs run by publicly supported institutions of high education.

http://www.wdrb.com/story/18946346/crawf...e-football

It was expected to happen. Big East will have to earn their spot in future the bowl games. If a BE team does make the playoffs, the public likes under dogs and that's what BE teams are going to be if they go against the other major conferences.

ACC Orange Bowl TV ratings over the years:

2006- 12.2
2007- 7.0
2009- 5.4
2010- 6.8
2011- 4.5

Congrats Orange Bowl!

People had their heads in the sand. I said all along the playoff is the worse thing that could have happened to the Non Aq's and the BE.

I think if you look at the numbers the Big East is at the worst equal to the ACC, if not better. Here is a look at how the six AQ conferences fared against AQ competition in 2011 in the regular season and bowls, not including the independents.

By victories

SEC: 14-4

Big 12: 12-5

Big Ten: 9-10

ACC: 9-16

Big East: 7-11

Pac-12: 7-12

The ACC had two more wins but you have to keep in mind they had four more teams. By the same vein, note the BE had a better record than the Pac-12, despite having four less teams... hmmmmm...

By winning percentage

SEC: .778

Big 12: .706

Big Ten: .474

Big East: .389

Pac-12: .368

ACC: .360

Here is breakdown of how the Big East fared against AQ conferences:

ACC: 4-4. Wins: West Virginia over Maryland and Clemson, Cincinnati over NC State, Syracuse over Wake Forest. Losses: USF to Miami, Rutgers to North Carolina, Louisville to North Carolina, Louisville to NC State.

Big Ten: 0-1. Pitt loss to Iowa.

Big 12: 1-1. Rutgers, UConn split with Iowa State.

Pac-12: 0-2. Pitt lost to Utah; Syracuse lost to USC.

SEC: 2-3. Wins: Cincinnati over Vanderbilt, Louisville over Kentucky. Losses: UConn to Vanderbilt; West Virginia to LSU; Cincinnati to Tennessee.

Seven of the 11 nonconference losses were by a touchdown or less. Three of the losses were by a field goal or less.

What I'm taking from this discussion is that, bottom line, the nBE has to DO something right now. There are some great solutions being tossed about. A lot of them actually look attractive. I like the Cotton, any of the other major bowls still bidding, some tri-tie-in with all three, beefing up a NYC bowl, getting NBC help and buying up a bowl, partnering with ND... All positive movement. What I fear is that the old BE mentality will fester, meaning we'll do absolutely nothing but wait. As well as we rebounded from the reallignment with all these great new schools... to let this Bowl situation kill us would be a shame. We're not without options here... DO we have to wait for the new TV deal/$$$ or a new comish to see any movement on this front? One thing, being a nBE fan sure means having the patience of Job.

(07-03-2012 09:22 PM)Bull Wrote:  What I'm taking from this discussion is that, bottom line, the nBE has to DO something right now. There are some great solutions being tossed about. A lot of them actually look attractive. I like the Cotton, any of the other major bowls still bidding, some tri-tie-in with all three, beefing up a NYC bowl, getting NBC help and buying up a bowl, partnering with ND... All positive movement. What I fear is that the old BE mentality will fester, meaning we'll do absolutely nothing but wait. As well as we rebounded from the reallignment with all these great new schools... to let this Bowl situation kill us would be a shame. We're not without options here... DO we have to wait for the new TV deal/$$$ or a new comish to see any movement on this front? One thing, being a nBE fan sure means having the patience of Job.

I've always said it is easy being a fan of the traditional elite schools (Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, LSU, ND, TX, USC, etc.). You never have any worries about getting shut out of any bowl opportunities, you don''t have to worry about money and you never have to worry about garnering respect--- all you have to do is watch your team on tv and buy your t-shirts from Wal-Mart (I guess you don't even have to do that). Being a fan of a Big East school is high risk/high reward proposition. When it is bad it is really bad, but when it is good the taste of victory is oh so sweet.

Who is the ACC going to be playing?

No better than a #2 from another league and then I have my doubts. They lose for winning the Orange Bowl. If the ACC is not in the Playoff and the other 4 are, that means the other 4 will face off in the semis and the SEC/B12 bowl and Rose leaving at best a #3 for the ACC.

Other than getting the slot at the Orange, how is the ACC better off in positioning than the BE?