If we ever win another $@&%#¥!! football game, I would go to a boca bowl. sounds like a good trip.

(05-25-2013 12:36 AM)Dracorex Wrote:  ESPN's Bham bowl lost its sponsorship in BBVA Compass bank due to terrible venue location and so it may open the door elsewhere... if only UAB had an OCS or something

Honestly, that place was a big cement bowl in a war zone. the pizza bowl wasn't exactly a dream of a bowl bid. nice city. crappy venue. I stopped for cigarettes at a quickee mart close by the stadium. It was enclosed in cyclone fencing. No, it was encaged in cyclone fencing. my wife looked up from her iPhone at that point long enough to ask me what the hell I had gotten her into.

Now that I think about it, she did the exact same thing when she saw the tranny on bourbon street after the NO bowl. it took four hurricanes to calm her down.

(05-25-2013 06:15 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 08:35 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  I think HogDawg meant that teams with 6-6 records (or even 6-7 records like last year)
should not be rewarded with a post-season game. They should move to a playoff system where only conference champions and a few at-large teams go to the post-season (like every other sport).

Bingo. I took it for granted that everyone should think this way.

I guess we will have to create a playoff structure before everyone realizes that it really hasn't changed anything.

(05-25-2013 02:29 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 02:00 PM)fedale Wrote:  I hate hearing Chik-Fil-A bowl, and the KFC Famous Bowl, etc... I love the old fashion names like (Citrus Bowl, Cotton Bowl, Tangerine Bowl, Sun Bowl, etc)

Im afraid those days are gone forever.

This would be a good bowl for CUSA IMHO. Boca is a resort town, 2 minutes from the beach. You can drive one hour and be in South Beach and 3-4 hours to Key West depending on traffic. 3 Airports to make travel easy and easily enough hotel and restaurants to accomodate it.

There is only one other bowl in South Florida, and the area could easily handle another. I could even see one of the power 5 wanting one of their teams in this as a reward for their kids and giving boosters a marquee destination.

I agree. FAU would be a great location to have a bowl. People that haven't been to South Florida don't know how beautiful it is down here. I would love for FIU to be host of this bowl game but I must admit, FAU's stadium is more adequate for such an event.

Hopefully this bowl means the Little Caesars Bowl & Birmingham Bowl are gone. Two of the worst. Our bowl in Boise isn't anything special either.

South Florida is a great location. Boca bowl has my vote.

(05-25-2013 12:36 AM)Dracorex Wrote:  ESPN's Bham bowl lost its sponsorship in BBVA Compass bank due to terrible venue location and so it may open the door elsewhere... if only UAB had an OCS or something

Not true BBVA dropped it for financial reasons not because of the venue

Boca Bowl has a certain ring to it, I like it. If it were to become a real bowl, I would hope that the sponsor(s) would put their name at the top of the card and not slap it over the entire title. (Sponsor) Boca Bowl vs. (Sponsor) Bowl (that happens to be played in Boca Raton) I think that fans would identify more with a place than with a corporation.

(05-25-2013 08:04 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 06:15 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 08:35 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  I think HogDawg meant that teams with 6-6 records (or even 6-7 records like last year)
should not be rewarded with a post-season game. They should move to a playoff system where only conference champions and a few at-large teams go to the post-season (like every other sport).

Bingo. I took it for granted that everyone should think this way.

I guess we will have to create a playoff structure before everyone realizes that it really hasn't changed anything.

It would be like the NCAA Basketball Tournament. A few bubble teams do get disappointed. But #1 and #2 rarely make it to the championship game. It's a true postseason. What we have now is a bunch of cities trying to find the team that can bring the most fans to their city.

I don't see why they can't have a 16 team playoff and 20 irrelevant bowls at the same time.

(05-25-2013 11:43 AM)DAWGZILLA Wrote:  I don't want a bowl game in a on-campus facility. To me, the playing venue is part of the reward. NFL stadiums, MLB stadiums or neutral site venues are the best options.

Somebody has yet to see any pics of FAU Stadium. Trust me, playing there is an award.

(05-26-2013 07:25 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 08:04 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 06:15 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 08:35 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  I think HogDawg meant that teams with 6-6 records (or even 6-7 records like last year)
should not be rewarded with a post-season game. They should move to a playoff system where only conference champions and a few at-large teams go to the post-season (like every other sport).

Bingo. I took it for granted that everyone should think this way.

I guess we will have to create a playoff structure before everyone realizes that it really hasn't changed anything.

It would be like the NCAA Basketball Tournament. A few bubble teams do get disappointed. But #1 and #2 rarely make it to the championship game. It's a true postseason. What we have now is a bunch of cities trying to find the team that can bring the most fans to their city.

I don't see why they can't have a 16 team playoff and 20 irrelevant bowls at the same time.

the ncaa basketball tournament is one of several specious arguments that are typically employed in the service of a football playoff. but ultimately, the massive size of the field is an admission that the process is hopelessly flawed. the controversy in basketball is minimized by one, and only one reason; the massive size of the field. when you are inviting nearly 70 teams, by the time you get to the one or two or 5 or 6 getting screwed, no one cares. they are invariably the sort of programs that no one minds screwing -- southern miss this past year, for example. that's not a "fix", that's simply ensuring that you phuck teams that don't matter to anyone.

you can't have a 70 team football playoff, and inviting any relatively small number of teams, irrespective of the means of selection, actually creates a bigger grievance than the current system -- which is pretty much picking #1 and #2 (That part, they currently seem to get right nearly every time. it's the "down ballot" bcs bowls that seem to give everyone the vapors).

the point is, if you have an X team playoff, you are TRULY screwing teams X+1 through X+3, since entry into the playoff is a real shot at a national title. and you are still picking them completely arbitrarily. you may as well throw 16 darts at a copy of the top 25; you would be as accurate.

in the final analysis, picking a playoff bracket isn't any less arbitrary and inequitable than picking the two teams to play for the national championship. it seems fair and proper, but it isn't. it has precisely the same flaw as the current hated system.

(05-26-2013 09:43 AM)FAUAEPi Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 11:43 AM)DAWGZILLA Wrote:  I don't want a bowl game in a on-campus facility. To me, the playing venue is part of the reward. NFL stadiums, MLB stadiums or neutral site venues are the best options.

Somebody has yet to see any pics of FAU Stadium. Trust me, playing there is an award.

brand new. $70 million bucks. seats 30K -- which may sound snug at first, but that's about what a successful c-usa bowl game draws. yeah, I don't understand the problem.

unless they can't sell beer since it's an on campus venue, in which case the whole idea can go to hell.

If the bowl is gonna be in the north during december/january, it better be indoors...

Otherwise put it in the south where it's not 30 degrees outside.

And bowls wonder why they lose money.

(05-26-2013 12:36 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 07:25 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 08:04 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 06:15 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 08:35 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  I think HogDawg meant that teams with 6-6 records (or even 6-7 records like last year)
should not be rewarded with a post-season game. They should move to a playoff system where only conference champions and a few at-large teams go to the post-season (like every other sport).

Bingo. I took it for granted that everyone should think this way.

I guess we will have to create a playoff structure before everyone realizes that it really hasn't changed anything.

It would be like the NCAA Basketball Tournament. A few bubble teams do get disappointed. But #1 and #2 rarely make it to the championship game. It's a true postseason. What we have now is a bunch of cities trying to find the team that can bring the most fans to their city.

I don't see why they can't have a 16 team playoff and 20 irrelevant bowls at the same time.

the ncaa basketball tournament is one of several specious arguments that are typically employed in the service of a football playoff. but ultimately, the massive size of the field is an admission that the process is hopelessly flawed. the controversy in basketball is minimized by one, and only one reason; the massive size of the field. when you are inviting nearly 70 teams, by the time you get to the one or two or 5 or 6 getting screwed, no one cares. they are invariably the sort of programs that no one minds screwing -- southern miss this past year, for example. that's not a "fix", that's simply ensuring that you phuck teams that don't matter to anyone.

you can't have a 70 team football playoff, and inviting any relatively small number of teams, irrespective of the means of selection, actually creates a bigger grievance than the current system -- which is pretty much picking #1 and #2 (That part, they currently seem to get right nearly every time. it's the "down ballot" bcs bowls that seem to give everyone the vapors).

the point is, if you have an X team playoff, you are TRULY screwing teams X+1 through X+3, since entry into the playoff is a real shot at a national title. and you are still picking them completely arbitrarily. you may as well throw 16 darts at a copy of the top 25; you would be as accurate.

in the final analysis, picking a playoff bracket isn't any less arbitrary and inequitable than picking the two teams to play for the national championship. it seems fair and proper, but it isn't. it has precisely the same flaw as the current hated system.

Everything you said is true--that being said, the one place the NCAA tournament has it right and the main reason there is so little complaining is that EVERY champion is included. By including the theoretical best team from each conference--you have already eliminated the vast majority of potential issues. From a starting point where everyone is already included, any further additions/ommisions become far far less controversial.

A bowl in a conference mates stadium does not sound appealing at all.

(05-26-2013 01:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 12:36 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 07:25 AM)T_Won1 Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 08:04 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(05-25-2013 06:15 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  Bingo. I took it for granted that everyone should think this way.

I guess we will have to create a playoff structure before everyone realizes that it really hasn't changed anything.

It would be like the NCAA Basketball Tournament. A few bubble teams do get disappointed. But #1 and #2 rarely make it to the championship game. It's a true postseason. What we have now is a bunch of cities trying to find the team that can bring the most fans to their city.

I don't see why they can't have a 16 team playoff and 20 irrelevant bowls at the same time.

the ncaa basketball tournament is one of several specious arguments that are typically employed in the service of a football playoff. but ultimately, the massive size of the field is an admission that the process is hopelessly flawed. the controversy in basketball is minimized by one, and only one reason; the massive size of the field. when you are inviting nearly 70 teams, by the time you get to the one or two or 5 or 6 getting screwed, no one cares. they are invariably the sort of programs that no one minds screwing -- southern miss this past year, for example. that's not a "fix", that's simply ensuring that you phuck teams that don't matter to anyone.

you can't have a 70 team football playoff, and inviting any relatively small number of teams, irrespective of the means of selection, actually creates a bigger grievance than the current system -- which is pretty much picking #1 and #2 (That part, they currently seem to get right nearly every time. it's the "down ballot" bcs bowls that seem to give everyone the vapors).

the point is, if you have an X team playoff, you are TRULY screwing teams X+1 through X+3, since entry into the playoff is a real shot at a national title. and you are still picking them completely arbitrarily. you may as well throw 16 darts at a copy of the top 25; you would be as accurate.

in the final analysis, picking a playoff bracket isn't any less arbitrary and inequitable than picking the two teams to play for the national championship. it seems fair and proper, but it isn't. it has precisely the same flaw as the current hated system.

Everything you said is true--that being said, the one place the NCAA tournament has it right and the main reason there is so little complaining is that EVERY champion is included. By including the theoretical best team from each conference--you have already eliminated the vast majority of potential issues. From a starting point where everyone is already included, any further additions/ommisions become far far less controversial.

I think the current conferences are at the root of the whole problem. there is no way the winner of the big sky conference gets in before the runner up in the acc, just for example.

If you want a football playoff, the first step is to dismantle the current conferences. All of them. Divide the country into quadrants, with the origin of the x-y axis at the population center of the country, say, st. Louis. those are your four conferences. subdivide each conference into quadrants; those are your divisions. the entire regular season becomes a tourney within the divisions to play for the conference championship. the four conference champions play in the national playoff.

if you aren't willing to start with a blank sheet of paper, there is no sense in even talking about a playoff. to do so would simply to perpetuate the existing means of control, to protect the entrenched powers that be, and make it even more impossible to break through the barrier to the "privileged teams".

Anyone know who this guy is? He says that either the AAC Aeresco/Marlins Bowl will happen or the CUSA Boca Raton Bowl will happen---but not both. He is a Sun Sentinel writer. Anyone have a feel for how accurate he tends to be?

Dieter Kurtenbach‏@dkurtenbach19h
Conference USA is working to get a bowl game, the AAC is working to get a bowl game. I’m told only one will happen. We’ll see.

(05-26-2013 03:11 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Anyone know who this guy is? He says that either the AAC Aeresco/Marlins Bowl will happen or the CUSA Boca Raton Bowl will happen---but not both. He is a Sun Sentinel writer. Anyone have a feel for how accurate he tends to be?

Dieter Kurtenbach‏@dkurtenbach19h
Conference USA is working to get a bowl game, the AAC is working to get a bowl game. I’m told only one will happen. We’ll see.

don't know, but if only one can happen might as well make it a CUSA/AAC bowl game

(05-26-2013 03:38 PM)techdawg88 Wrote:  

(05-26-2013 03:11 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Anyone know who this guy is? He says that either the AAC Aeresco/Marlins Bowl will happen or the CUSA Boca Raton Bowl will happen---but not both. He is a Sun Sentinel writer. Anyone have a feel for how accurate he tends to be?

Dieter Kurtenbach‏@dkurtenbach19h
Conference USA is working to get a bowl game, the AAC is working to get a bowl game. I’m told only one will happen. We’ll see.

don't know, but if only one can happen might as well make it a CUSA/AAC bowl game

lol, theres probably going to be 5 or 6 of those already. But seriously, that is exactly what Kertenbach was predicting on twitter.

Dieter is FAU's beat writer for the Sun Sentinel.

He's got some good sources and was way ahead of the curve on Tulas to AAC and WKU to CUSA.