Here is my question:

If the BCS SF rotation bowls remain at 6 -

Then is it worth being in that game whatsoever? I feel like the BE Championship game (BE #1 v. x) would be better if this BCS Bowl #7 doesn't work out.

*Side thought - It is ridiculous how the BE is being pushed out of the power circle. We have the same amount of teams as the Big10 in top 25 and we dont have access in BCS Bowls? I mean - I think this is almost lawsuit worthy because it PREVENTS outside 'contract' conferences to $$.

I am so pissed off. If the BE is left out of BCS Money then it truly is a disgrace to the system.

I doubt it comes to that. There is too much money to be made if its a BCS bowl. And the SEC would likely want an opportunity to put 3 or more at-large SEC teams in BCS bowls, and this bowl would give them that opportunity.

(10-05-2012 11:46 AM)SMUfrat Wrote:  *Side thought - It is ridiculous how the BE is being pushed out of the power circle. We have the same amount of teams as the Big10 in top 25 and we dont have access in BCS Bowls? I mean - I think this is almost lawsuit worthy because it PREVENTS outside 'contract' conferences to $$.

I am so pissed off. If the BE is left out of BCS Money then it truly is a disgrace to the system.

College football is as much an entertainment spectacle as it is a sport. It's more realistic than pro-wrestling, but in both cases the people in charge want the most popular wrestler / team to win the match.

The way they're going to accomplish this in high level college football is by allowing the free market to decide who get's the most exposure and most resources. To be honest, it's not totally unreasonable. The reason these major games payout tens of millions of dollars is because the TV networks are charging advertisers hundreds of millions. Those advertisers are really only interested in a handful of programs at the top. Looking at the top 10 right now, I'm sure the Fiesta Bowl advertisers are rooting against Kansas State every weekend because they really only want Texas or Oklahoma in that game.

If the BE wants back into the power circle there is only one way of getting back in, and it has nothing to do with winning on the field. We need some of the 32 million households in BE markets to start tuning into our games, and we need at least one program to start pulling in ratings on par with the top programs in those other conferences. We don't even need every member to be a big draw, just one or two. the Rose Bowl isn't paying for a chance at showing Indiana vs Arizona, they're paying for Ohio State vs USC. We need an Ohio State, we need a USC, and we need them to not get poached as soon as they start doing well.

Best way to look at it:

Playoffs = The Oscars

Bowls = Movie theaters

The playoffs and Oscars are based on merit (or at least a perception of merit since there isn't an objective ranking system). In contrast, movie theaters only care about selling tickets no matter how bad the movie might be (so they'll show the latest Transformers sequel on thousands of screens and relegate an Oscar winner like The Artist to only a handful), and by the same token, bowls only care about selling tickets (with a large does of TV ratings) no matter how bad a team might be.

Thus, the playoffs are about what teams "deserve" *on-the-field* based on merit. The bowls are about what teams "deserve" *off-the-field* based on the free market. As long as you keep those two concepts and motivations separate, you will stop beating yourself up on why Conference A that's performing poorly gets way better bowl money and access than Conference B that's performing well (or at least understand that's how the world works).

(10-05-2012 02:20 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Best way to look at it:

Playoffs = The Oscars

Bowls = Movie theaters

The playoffs and Oscars are based on merit (or at least a perception of merit since there isn't an objective ranking system). In contrast, movie theaters only care about selling tickets no matter how bad the movie might be (so they'll show the latest Transformers sequel on thousands of screens and relegate an Oscar winner like The Artist to only a handful), and by the same token, bowls only care about selling tickets (with a large does of TV ratings) no matter how bad a team might be.

Thus, the playoffs are about what teams "deserve" *on-the-field* based on merit. The bowls are about what teams "deserve" *off-the-field* based on the free market. As long as you keep those two concepts and motivations separate, you will stop beating yourself up on why Conference A that's performing poorly gets way better bowl money and access than Conference B that's performing well (or at least understand that's how the world works).

this should help people understand exactly why the ACC is going to allow N Dame to be apart of their bowl rotation. instead of taking bowls away from conference teams, they really open up access to bowls that normally wouldn't consider most ACC teams

(10-05-2012 11:46 AM)SMUfrat Wrote:  Here is my question:

If the BCS SF rotation bowls remain at 6 -

Then is it worth being in that game whatsoever? I feel like the BE Championship game (BE #1 v. x) would be better if this BCS Bowl #7 doesn't work out.

*Side thought - It is ridiculous how the BE is being pushed out of the power circle. We have the same amount of teams as the Big10 in top 25 and we dont have access in BCS Bowls? I mean - I think this is almost lawsuit worthy because it PREVENTS outside 'contract' conferences to $$.

I am so pissed off. If the BE is left out of BCS Money then it truly is a disgrace to the system.

Who would we sue, the major bowls for wanting tie ins with power5 conferences but not us?

I am not worried. I care about the TV deal more than I do the bowl structure. Hopefully we will see an eight team playoff in the future so all this talk about access and contracts is just another step in the process.

(10-05-2012 02:54 PM)fresco Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 11:46 AM)SMUfrat Wrote:  Here is my question:

If the BCS SF rotation bowls remain at 6 -

Then is it worth being in that game whatsoever? I feel like the BE Championship game (BE #1 v. x) would be better if this BCS Bowl #7 doesn't work out.

*Side thought - It is ridiculous how the BE is being pushed out of the power circle. We have the same amount of teams as the Big10 in top 25 and we dont have access in BCS Bowls? I mean - I think this is almost lawsuit worthy because it PREVENTS outside 'contract' conferences to $$.

I am so pissed off. If the BE is left out of BCS Money then it truly is a disgrace to the system.

Who would we sue, the major bowls for wanting tie ins with power5 conferences but not us?

They don't sue anyone, they talk to friends in Congress and get the US Attorney General to look into anti competitive practices (anti-trust violations).

(10-05-2012 02:54 PM)fresco Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 11:46 AM)SMUfrat Wrote:  Here is my question:

If the BCS SF rotation bowls remain at 6 -

Then is it worth being in that game whatsoever? I feel like the BE Championship game (BE #1 v. x) would be better if this BCS Bowl #7 doesn't work out.

*Side thought - It is ridiculous how the BE is being pushed out of the power circle. We have the same amount of teams as the Big10 in top 25 and we dont have access in BCS Bowls? I mean - I think this is almost lawsuit worthy because it PREVENTS outside 'contract' conferences to $$.

I am so pissed off. If the BE is left out of BCS Money then it truly is a disgrace to the system.

Who would we sue, the major bowls for wanting tie ins with power5 conferences but not us?

You may be able to do something with the anti-trust laws--but I think the best bet for a legal based solution is to go at the process via governmental intervention.

The most effective way to combat the process is by attacking the free market model its based on. The entire underpinning is TV advertising dollars. Companies want to advertise to large audiences to increase the profile, popularity, and total sales of their products. What they do NOT want, is to be associated with anything that would decrease the popularity and profitablility of their products.

An organized boycott by fans of non-AQ schools of all goods and services advertised on BCS games would likely be far more effective than any army of lawyers ever would. Tons of negative letters pouring into the corporate headquarters of major advertisers explaining the inequities of the system and the reason why individual customers have chosen to avoid thier product (association with an unfair entity in college football) would cause the flow of money into that system to slow dramatically. Im guessing the non-AQ access issues would be corrected quite quickly. The biggest problem is that advertisers have been sold on the concept that only Texas/Notre Dame/USC/Oklahoma/Michigan matters and the non-Aq's can be eliminated without the slightest concern of alienating the non-AQ fans (who probably make up close to 50% of the college football viewing audience).

Contrary to Delany's comments, Aresco still thinks a 7th BCS contract bowl will happen, as posted in a couple of other threads:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/col...1969.story

"You've read about the seventh bowl that commissioners are considering that we think eventually will happen. That'll give the Big East needed access to the highest level of the new system….It would be a contract bowl where you'd have to put the bowl together but would have obviously semifinal games."

all parties agreed to basically eliminate what is now known as the bcs & replace it with the playoffs. all parties agreed to preserve the bowl system so why would they sue after they already agreed to these basic provisions ?since the bcs will no longer exist every bowl is now free to contract with whomever they see fit to do business with. c-usa looks to be thinking outside of the box by contracting with a bowl that also serves as a fundraiser for a worthy cause & probably assures them of a decent turnout at the very least. the BE should be looking in this type of direction

(10-05-2012 04:45 PM)mj4life Wrote:  all parties agreed to basically eliminate what is now known as the bcs & replace it with the playoffs. all parties agreed to preserve the bowl system so why would they sue after they already agreed to the basic provisions above? since the bcs will no longer exist every bowl is now free to contract with whomever they see fit to do business with. c-usa looks to be thinking outside of the box by contracting with a bowl that also serves as a fundraiser for a worthy cause & probably assures them of a decent turnout at the very least. the BE should be looking in this type of direction

The BE is doing exactly that. It's called the BE Champs' bowl. But it won't be finalized until the 7th bowl is finalized first.

(10-05-2012 02:20 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Best way to look at it:

Playoffs = The Oscars

Bowls = Movie theaters

The playoffs and Oscars are based on merit (or at least a perception of merit since there isn't an objective ranking system). In contrast, movie theaters only care about selling tickets no matter how bad the movie might be (so they'll show the latest Transformers sequel on thousands of screens and relegate an Oscar winner like The Artist to only a handful), and by the same token, bowls only care about selling tickets (with a large does of TV ratings) no matter how bad a team might be.

Thus, the playoffs are about what teams "deserve" *on-the-field* based on merit. The bowls are about what teams "deserve" *off-the-field* based on the free market. As long as you keep those two concepts and motivations separate, you will stop beating yourself up on why Conference A that's performing poorly gets way better bowl money and access than Conference B that's performing well (or at least understand that's how the world works).

A good way to look at it.

Fortunately for UC, we have earned a reputation as a fanbase that will travel well to big-time bowls. So if we have a good enough season, I have no doubt that the Sugar or Orange Bowls will want us back. So I'm not as up-in-arms over this as I was a few months ago when it looked like the BE would be completely shut out from the big bowl games.

We don't have an auto-bid any more, so it's not as good as it was before, but it could be a lot worse for us.

UC took 20K to the Orange and 30K to the sugar...by Fresco's very definition we are a big time program...again, using Fresquo's definition.

(10-05-2012 03:11 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 02:54 PM)fresco Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 11:46 AM)SMUfrat Wrote:  Here is my question:

If the BCS SF rotation bowls remain at 6 -

Then is it worth being in that game whatsoever? I feel like the BE Championship game (BE #1 v. x) would be better if this BCS Bowl #7 doesn't work out.

*Side thought - It is ridiculous how the BE is being pushed out of the power circle. We have the same amount of teams as the Big10 in top 25 and we dont have access in BCS Bowls? I mean - I think this is almost lawsuit worthy because it PREVENTS outside 'contract' conferences to $$.

I am so pissed off. If the BE is left out of BCS Money then it truly is a disgrace to the system.

Who would we sue, the major bowls for wanting tie ins with power5 conferences but not us?

They don't sue anyone, they talk to friends in Congress and get the US Attorney General to look into anti competitive practices (anti-trust violations).

Good luck proving that the rose bowl's contract with the B1G and PAC is an anti-competitive trust.

(10-05-2012 10:36 PM)fresco Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 03:11 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 02:54 PM)fresco Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 11:46 AM)SMUfrat Wrote:  Here is my question:

If the BCS SF rotation bowls remain at 6 -

Then is it worth being in that game whatsoever? I feel like the BE Championship game (BE #1 v. x) would be better if this BCS Bowl #7 doesn't work out.

*Side thought - It is ridiculous how the BE is being pushed out of the power circle. We have the same amount of teams as the Big10 in top 25 and we dont have access in BCS Bowls? I mean - I think this is almost lawsuit worthy because it PREVENTS outside 'contract' conferences to $$.

I am so pissed off. If the BE is left out of BCS Money then it truly is a disgrace to the system.

Who would we sue, the major bowls for wanting tie ins with power5 conferences but not us?

They don't sue anyone, they talk to friends in Congress and get the US Attorney General to look into anti competitive practices (anti-trust violations).

Good luck proving that the rose bowl's contract with the B1G and PAC is an anti-competitive trust.

What's your point?

(10-05-2012 10:44 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 10:36 PM)fresco Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 03:11 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 02:54 PM)fresco Wrote:  

(10-05-2012 11:46 AM)SMUfrat Wrote:  Here is my question:

If the BCS SF rotation bowls remain at 6 -

Then is it worth being in that game whatsoever? I feel like the BE Championship game (BE #1 v. x) would be better if this BCS Bowl #7 doesn't work out.

*Side thought - It is ridiculous how the BE is being pushed out of the power circle. We have the same amount of teams as the Big10 in top 25 and we dont have access in BCS Bowls? I mean - I think this is almost lawsuit worthy because it PREVENTS outside 'contract' conferences to $$.

I am so pissed off. If the BE is left out of BCS Money then it truly is a disgrace to the system.

Who would we sue, the major bowls for wanting tie ins with power5 conferences but not us?

They don't sue anyone, they talk to friends in Congress and get the US Attorney General to look into anti competitive practices (anti-trust violations).

Good luck proving that the rose bowl's contract with the B1G and PAC is an anti-competitive trust.

What's your point?

That there is no legal avenue to forcing major bowls to give us greater access.

The reality is that for the near term, probably 5-10 years, the Big East bowl picture is not going to be ideal. The mid term outlook, probably 10-25 years, is very solid. UC, Louisville, BSU are all doing very well. The middle teams are packed and no one can overlook a middle of the pack team, even OOC. As the fan bases for each school build, there will be more opportunity, bowl wise, than the near term.

The long term, measured in decades, is that the rust belt is still the rust belt. They may be adapting to a newer economy and less industry, but people are retiring and taking jobs all over the country to get out of the frozen mid-west north. The northeast loses a lot of people but they also receive a lot through immigration. The new teams added, with BSU as an exception, are all growing areas. The fan bases will grow as will the markets the Big East is in.

Also, right now the SEC, Big 10 and AC 12 have the most dynamic Conference commissioners, but that will not always be the case. SEC football is the strongest, but that will not always be the case (especially if the NCAA ever decides to uphold teh "student" portion of student athlete).

(10-06-2012 08:46 AM)HtownOrange Wrote:  Also, right now the SEC, Big 10 and AC 12 have the most dynamic Conference commissioners,

After what I've seen the past couple of months, no they dont.