(11-06-2012 11:51 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I don't think it actually contradicts what he said. He said, "The commissioners also discussed the possibility of adding a seventh access bowl, but sources told ESPN last month the likelihood of the game has decreased." He wasn't saying it wasn't going to happen. The article really wasn't about the 7th bowl at all in fact and just is mentioning it as one additional thing that might or might not happen with the new BCS.

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. In a tweet earlier tonight, McMurphy said it was six bowls.

Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN

Big East part of smaller conferences. That group gets 1 bid w/in 6 bowls RT @ucfmat: @McMurphyESPN BE chances of getting one of them?

Also, in his article, McMurphy said the 7th bowl was in doubt. Bowlsby said it's still in play, and didn't characterize it as in doubt.

The other thing McMurphy said, about the rotation, IS in his article:

"Each of the six bowls is expected to host four semifinals during the 12-year period."

The article I just linked said the semifinal rotation has not been set.

I don't care that the Sugar got the Champions' bowl, lol. I do care about the number of bowls and the semifinal rotation. Yes, minor points in that article, but ones that people in this thread are assuming are likely to happen.

I'm just pointing out that an AP story tonight paints a slightly different picture, which essentially says the rotation is not set, and the 7th bowl is still in play, WITHOUT saying it probably won't happen.

(11-06-2012 11:51 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I don't think it actually contradicts what he said. He said, "The commissioners also discussed the possibility of adding a seventh access bowl, but sources told ESPN last month the likelihood of the game has decreased." He wasn't saying it wasn't going to happen. The article really wasn't about the 7th bowl at all in fact and just is mentioning it as one additional thing that might or might not happen with the new BCS.

Correct, and the comment leaving the door open for the seventh bowl is from Bowlsby, who wants to keep the idea alive because his league would have a place in the seventh bowl. What we need are statements from people who don't have a stake in that game, in order to know the likelihood of that game actually happening.

(11-07-2012 02:37 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(11-06-2012 11:51 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I don't think it actually contradicts what he said. He said, "The commissioners also discussed the possibility of adding a seventh access bowl, but sources told ESPN last month the likelihood of the game has decreased." He wasn't saying it wasn't going to happen. The article really wasn't about the 7th bowl at all in fact and just is mentioning it as one additional thing that might or might not happen with the new BCS.

Correct, and the comment leaving the door open for the seventh bowl is from Bowlsby, who wants to keep the idea alive because his league would have a place in the seventh bowl. What we need are statements from people who don't have a stake in that game, in order to know the likelihood of that game actually happening.

The thing is, 7 of 11 commissioners are on board--so the votes are there. It's really a matter of making the game work financially without negatively affecting the value of the other games. So far, I get the impression that has been a problem. Perhaps once the Big East tv contract is handled, the Big East's main carrier may have interest in acquiring the game.

One thing worth mentioning is that early reports were that the Champions Bowl announce was delayed in part due to issues involving the proposed 7th Bowl game. Since the Champions Bowl site has been named, wouldn't that imply that there has been some sort of deal struck on the 7th game? I guess it's possible they simply kicked the can down the road and will deal with it at the BCS meeting later this month (I think it's on the 12th).

(11-07-2012 12:07 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-06-2012 11:32 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(11-06-2012 10:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-06-2012 10:18 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(11-06-2012 09:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If I understand it correctly, all the bowls will be reshuffling the deck in 2014. So there could be some changes. Truth is, the Pac-12 has the weakest slate of bowls of all the power conferences, so the Big East would have the best chance of landing a #2 or #3 pick from the Pac. The BE already has a game vs the ACC #3---that may end up being thier best game. I hope they do better than this, but I could see the Big East ending up with two good (but not great) bowls. I could see the eastern division champ vs the ACC #3 in the Champs Bowl----and the western division champ vs the Pac-12 #3 in say the Holliday Bowl.

It may be that the PAC and ACC get together and do another bowl in addition to Sun Bowl.

Or the Big-12 and Pac-12. I think Houston will be active in trying to upgrade that bowl. So, I could see the Big East putting together a champions bowl there with the best pick they can get from the Big-12 and SEC. The SEC pick would be a #4 at best, but a Houston based bowl would jump all over LSU or A&M if they happened to be the #4 or #5 team in the SEC.

SEC #4 or 5? Good grief, you have gone bonkers!

Good point. Im aiming to low. SEC #3 or #4.

Nice comeback!

They need to start considering an eighth bowl. Seven won't work because there is no way to do an even semifinal rotation. With eight games, each bowl could host the semifinals three times in 12 years, while keeping their traditional match-ups the other nine times.

I think the one way a 7th bowl works well with a rotation is if the Rose/Sugar don't want to host as often. You could make a 6 bowl rotation, but have the 7th bowl take 2 spots from each of the Rose and Sugar. For instance, if you normally pair the Rose with the Peach, Orange with the Cotton, and Sugar with the Fiesta, it could look like this:

Year
1: Cotton, Orange
2: Fiesta, Sugar
3: Peach, 7th (in place of Rose Bowl)
4: Cotton, Orange
5: Fiesta, 7th (in place of Sugar Bowl)
6: Peach, Rose
7: Cotton, Orange
8: Fiesta, Sugar
9: Peach, 7th (in place of Rose Bowl)
10: Cotton, Orange
11: Fiesta, 7th (in place of Sugar Bowl)
12: Peach, Rose

(11-08-2012 01:45 PM)Lolly Popp Wrote:  They need to start considering an eighth bowl. Seven won't work because there is no way to do an even semifinal rotation. With eight games, each bowl could host the semifinals three times in 12 years, while keeping their traditional match-ups the other nine times.

8 BCS bowls should be enough to include all 10 conferences.

Rose: Big Ten - Pac 12
Sugar: SEC - Big Twelve
Orange: ACC - At large
Fiesta: At large - At large (semifinal)
Peach: At large - At large (semifinal)
Cotton: Big East - At large
Las Vegas: Mt West - Conference USA
Go Daddy: MAC - Sun Belt

(11-08-2012 02:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I think the one way a 7th bowl works well with a rotation is if the Rose/Sugar don't want to host as often. You could make a 6 bowl rotation, but have the 7th bowl take 2 spots from each of the Rose and Sugar. For instance, if you normally pair the Rose with the Peach, Orange with the Cotton, and Sugar with the Fiesta, it could look like thi

11: Fiesta, 7th (in place of Sugar Bowl)
12: Peach, Rose

But the Rose and Sugar want as many semis as they can get, they are not going to give any away to a 7th bowl.

The Big Ten/SEC/Big 12/PAC-12 want fewer though since they only get paid for those bowls in years they aren't semi-finals. I personally think they should be 4 years each, but I think 2-3 each is a definite possibility.

(11-08-2012 02:46 PM)andy76 Wrote:  8 BCS bowls should be enough to include all 10 conferences.

Rose: Big Ten - Pac 12
Sugar: SEC - Big Twelve
Orange: ACC - At large
Fiesta: At large - At large (semifinal)
Peach: At large - At large (semifinal)
Cotton: Big East - At large
Las Vegas: Mt West - Conference USA
Go Daddy: MAC - Sun Belt

That set-up wasn't exactly what I had in mind. First of all, the corrupt cabal won't go for it, and most importantly the Go Daddy stadium isn't big enough to host a semifinal. Not sure Las Vegas will have enough seats either.

Houston and San Antonio make sense. The Big East can play the Big 12, Pac-12, or ND in a deal similar to the Orange Bowl. Atlanta and San Antonio can be at-large vs. at-large with a clause for MWC, CUSA, MAC, and SBC.