(06-21-2013 08:57 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 08:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 08:09 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 07:52 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 11:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  That's the theory--but the reality is that most are poorly attended and have simply become a cushy job and a slush fund for the bowl committees. If the community support continues at the current level seen at most of these bottom bowls, then theres really no need to keep shoveling money into them.

Which bowls do you consider to be the bottom bowls? How are they arranged in order?

Any bowl that has to invite a 6-6 team (or worse) is bottom tier...

Didn't the Rose Bowl come close to having to offer 6-6 UCLA a bid, had they won the PAC title game last year or the year before?

I think it's better to define bowl tiers in terms of payouts.

IMO if the Rose Bowl had been forced to accept UCLA, they'd have been a bottom tier bowl, no matter the payout. And I believe UCLA would have been 6-7 entering the bowl game, if they had won the Pac that year...

No they would have been 7-6 if they had won the PAC. They were 6-6 going into the championship game.

(06-21-2013 08:58 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 08:57 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 08:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 08:09 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 07:52 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  Which bowls do you consider to be the bottom bowls? How are they arranged in order?

Any bowl that has to invite a 6-6 team (or worse) is bottom tier...

Didn't the Rose Bowl come close to having to offer 6-6 UCLA a bid, had they won the PAC title game last year or the year before?

I think it's better to define bowl tiers in terms of payouts.

IMO if the Rose Bowl had been forced to accept UCLA, they'd have been a bottom tier bowl, no matter the payout. And I believe UCLA would have been 6-7 entering the bowl game, if they had won the Pac that year...

No they would have been 7-6 if they had won the PAC. They were 6-6 going into the championship game.

Okay. I couldn't remember their record. But I knew it wasn't very good...

(06-21-2013 08:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 08:09 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 07:52 AM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 11:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 11:35 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  You do know there is more to this than what you are posting right? Like the fact that cities want the bowl game and the communities get behind them when it's their business hosting it.

That's the theory--but the reality is that most are poorly attended and have simply become a cushy job and a slush fund for the bowl committees. If the community support continues at the current level seen at most of these bottom bowls, then theres really no need to keep shoveling money into them.

Which bowls do you consider to be the bottom bowls? How are they arranged in order?

Any bowl that has to invite a 6-6 team (or worse) is bottom tier...

Didn't the Rose Bowl come close to having to offer 6-6 UCLA a bid, had they won the PAC title game last year or the year before?

I think it's better to define bowl tiers in terms of payouts.

I don't think going by payouts makes sense either. Some bowls have larger payouts but they require so many ticket purchases, hotels, etc. that you're more likely to lose money on those than on bowls with lower payouts.

UCLA went to the Rose Bowl in the mid-80s with a 6-4-1 record. The Bruins crushed the 10-1-0 Illini. Final score 45-9

Now granted, 6-4-1 is not as bad as 6-7. But still.

The idea of saying all 6-6 bowl games are crap bowls is completely ridiculous. Even I'm not a big enough homer to say that a 7-5 Troy team would be better than a 6-6 Auburn team. Even this would you take a 9-3 FAU team over a 7-5 University of Florida team who lost to five ranked teams?

There are way to many exceptions involved to classify a crappy bowl. What one fan might consider crap may be a classic to someone else because it's a team they don't get to play very often.

But I guess you guys must enjoy watching House Hunters and Christmas reruns from the 90's instead of football.

(06-21-2013 09:24 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  UCLA went to the Rose Bowl in the mid-80s with a 6-4-1 record. The Bruins crushed the 10-1-0 Illini. Final score 45-9

Now granted, 6-4-1 is not as bad as 6-7. But still.

Not even close. That 1983 UCLA team started out 0-3-1 with three non-conference losses to teams that finished 2nd, 4th, and 7th in the final AP poll that year, and then won 7 of their last 8. That 1983 team was light years better than the 2011 UCLA team that would have been just another 6-6 team in a minor bowl, except for 10-2 USC being on probation.

(06-22-2013 10:26 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 09:24 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  UCLA went to the Rose Bowl in the mid-80s with a 6-4-1 record. The Bruins crushed the 10-1-0 Illini. Final score 45-9

Now granted, 6-4-1 is not as bad as 6-7. But still.

Not even close. That 1983 UCLA team started out 0-3-1 with three non-conference losses to teams that finished 2nd, 4th, and 7th in the final AP poll that year, and then won 7 of their last 8. That 1983 team was light years better than the 2011 UCLA team that would have been just another 6-6 team in a minor bowl, except for 10-2 USC being on probation.

You just proved the fact that your record is not always an indication of how good a team is.

I still stand by saying I would take a 7-5 SEC team over a 9-3 ACC team just about every year.

(06-22-2013 10:35 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(06-22-2013 10:26 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-21-2013 09:24 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  UCLA went to the Rose Bowl in the mid-80s with a 6-4-1 record. The Bruins crushed the 10-1-0 Illini. Final score 45-9

Now granted, 6-4-1 is not as bad as 6-7. But still.

Not even close. That 1983 UCLA team started out 0-3-1 with three non-conference losses to teams that finished 2nd, 4th, and 7th in the final AP poll that year, and then won 7 of their last 8. That 1983 team was light years better than the 2011 UCLA team that would have been just another 6-6 team in a minor bowl, except for 10-2 USC being on probation.

You just proved the fact that your record is not always an indication of how good a team is.

I still stand by saying I would take a 7-5 SEC team over a 9-3 ACC team just about every year.

Again, that depends on the 7-5 team's resume. In hoops, I always roll my eyes when the ESPN talking heads drool over some 8th place team in a big conference that has lots of "good losses" but few if any "good wins". A 7-5 SEC team might be like that. (Or even an 8-5 SEC team, like 2012 Mississippi State.) They might have five "good losses" but their wins are from beating an FCS team, three last-place teams from non-contract conferences, plus wins over the three worst teams in the SEC.

(06-22-2013 10:07 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  The idea of saying all 6-6 bowl games are crap bowls is completely ridiculous. Even I'm not a big enough homer to say that a 7-5 Troy team would be better than a 6-6 Auburn team. Even this would you take a 9-3 FAU team over a 7-5 University of Florida team who lost to five ranked teams?

I think you make two excellent points. First, not all 6-6 records are equal. As you say, an Auburn that goes 6-6 against a brutal SEC schedule is probably equal to a 9-3 or 10-2 C-USA team that played a #110 schedule.

Second, like you, I like watching all these cheesy little beefy bowls and weed eater bowls that are played on Tuesday December 21, even if they do feature mediocre teams. They are part of my holiday tradition and would not want to see them go away.

Just a little food for thought MAC teams don't travel well at all. Ohio in Independance bowl, how many did you think showed up? I would say under 3,000. Kent st to the Godaddy bowl which had 2 Great teams playing..Kent st might have had 4,000. Arkansas st Had a 10 hour drive and they sold 15k tickets to godaddy bowl. Louisiana sold 40k tickets to New Orleans bowl. Not all non bcs school fail to travel to bowl games. the Bowl system need to be revamped, not changed completely!

(06-23-2013 11:32 AM)RustonCAT Wrote:  Just a little food for thought MAC teams don't travel well at all. Ohio in Independance bowl, how many did you think showed up? I would say under 3,000. Kent st to the Godaddy bowl which had 2 Great teams playing..Kent st might have had 4,000. Arkansas st Had a 10 hour drive and they sold 15k tickets to godaddy bowl. Louisiana sold 40k tickets to New Orleans bowl. Not all non bcs school fail to travel to bowl games. the Bowl system need to be revamped, not changed completely!

Personally, I think the G5 bowl model needs to be changed completely. Every G5 bowl needs to be conference owned. There is absolutely no value being added by these "bowl committees". The G5 could either own these bowls individually or collectively and the end results would make more sense and generate more G5 revenue than the current model.

(06-23-2013 12:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:32 AM)RustonCAT Wrote:  Just a little food for thought MAC teams don't travel well at all. Ohio in Independance bowl, how many did you think showed up? I would say under 3,000. Kent st to the Godaddy bowl which had 2 Great teams playing..Kent st might have had 4,000. Arkansas st Had a 10 hour drive and they sold 15k tickets to godaddy bowl. Louisiana sold 40k tickets to New Orleans bowl. Not all non bcs school fail to travel to bowl games. the Bowl system need to be revamped, not changed completely!

Personally, I think the G5 bowl model needs to be changed completely. Every G5 bowl needs to be conference owned. There is absolutely no value being added by these "bowl committees". The G5 could either own these bowls individually or collectively and the end results would make more sense and generate more G5 revenue than the current model.

I think the New Mexico and Hawaii games are co-owned by ESPN and the MWC. ESPN co-owns a couple of other minor bowls as well. FS1 wants bowl games, they could easily partner with a conference or two to own and operate a few bowls.

(06-23-2013 11:32 AM)RustonCAT Wrote:  Just a little food for thought MAC teams don't travel well at all. Ohio in Independance bowl, how many did you think showed up? I would say under 3,000. Kent st to the Godaddy bowl which had 2 Great teams playing..Kent st might have had 4,000. Arkansas st Had a 10 hour drive and they sold 15k tickets to godaddy bowl. Louisiana sold 40k tickets to New Orleans bowl. Not all non bcs school fail to travel to bowl games. the Bowl system need to be revamped, not changed completely!

15 hours is a long way though for Kent St. fans. Not something you'd wanna try to do in 1 day. Which makes it a lot more difficult.

(06-23-2013 06:00 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:32 AM)RustonCAT Wrote:  Just a little food for thought MAC teams don't travel well at all. Ohio in Independance bowl, how many did you think showed up? I would say under 3,000. Kent st to the Godaddy bowl which had 2 Great teams playing..Kent st might have had 4,000. Arkansas st Had a 10 hour drive and they sold 15k tickets to godaddy bowl. Louisiana sold 40k tickets to New Orleans bowl. Not all non bcs school fail to travel to bowl games. the Bowl system need to be revamped, not changed completely!

15 hours is a long way though for Kent St. fans. Not something you'd wanna try to do in 1 day. Which makes it a lot more difficult.

Sunday night too! So yes Kent st was at a slight disadvantage but both were truely...If it had not been for a Sunday games than Arkansas st would have sold it out!

(06-23-2013 06:00 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:32 AM)RustonCAT Wrote:  Just a little food for thought MAC teams don't travel well at all. Ohio in Independance bowl, how many did you think showed up? I would say under 3,000. Kent st to the Godaddy bowl which had 2 Great teams playing..Kent st might have had 4,000. Arkansas st Had a 10 hour drive and they sold 15k tickets to godaddy bowl. Louisiana sold 40k tickets to New Orleans bowl. Not all non bcs school fail to travel to bowl games. the Bowl system need to be revamped, not changed completely!

15 hours is a long way though for Kent St. fans. Not something you'd wanna try to do in 1 day. Which makes it a lot more difficult.

You bring up a legit point on travel. I'd like to see an AAC team play the MAC champ in either St Pete or Miami, but I wonder if it wouldn't be better to play the MAC champ in Annapolis. The ACC #7/8 slated for Annapolis could play the AAC in either Miami or St Pete. Either that, or move the LCB to the dome in Indy and do an AAC vs MAC champ game there.

(06-23-2013 07:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 06:00 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:32 AM)RustonCAT Wrote:  Just a little food for thought MAC teams don't travel well at all. Ohio in Independance bowl, how many did you think showed up? I would say under 3,000. Kent st to the Godaddy bowl which had 2 Great teams playing..Kent st might have had 4,000. Arkansas st Had a 10 hour drive and they sold 15k tickets to godaddy bowl. Louisiana sold 40k tickets to New Orleans bowl. Not all non bcs school fail to travel to bowl games. the Bowl system need to be revamped, not changed completely!

15 hours is a long way though for Kent St. fans. Not something you'd wanna try to do in 1 day. Which makes it a lot more difficult.

You bring up a legit point on travel. I'd like to see an AAC team play the MAC champ in either St Pete or Miami, but I wonder if it wouldn't be better to play the MAC champ in Annapolis. The ACC #7/8 slated for Annapolis could play the AAC in either Miami or St Pete. Either that, or move the LCB to the dome in Indy and do an AAC vs MAC champ game there.

A lot of MAC fans would be more than happy to have a bowl in Indy (or St. Louis). Against anybody. That would be short travel for almost everyone in the MAC. So far Indy hasn't shown any interest in a bowl though.

Why do AAC fans insist that the other eastern G5 conferences will happily send their champions to play AAC also rans?

(06-23-2013 08:03 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Why do AAC fans insist that the other eastern G5 conferences will happily send their champions to play AAC also rans?

Yea, I'd rather have the MAC champ play the Sun Belt or CUSA champ than an AAC also-ran.

(06-23-2013 08:03 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Why do AAC fans insist that the other eastern G5 conferences will happily send their champions to play AAC also rans?

Maybe the same reason everyone just assumes the Sunbelt champ will be available and wont be able to cut a better deal with the AAC. The MAC teams are terrible travelers and the bowls are not generally rushing to grab their teams. The rumor Ive heard is that the Sunbelt champ is playing an AAC team in New Orleans. If true (and I think that's very possible), what champ is the MAC going to play?

The MW champ? Are they going to dump the Pac-12?

CUSA? Is CUSA really going to dump the Big12/B1G on New Years Day to play the MAC champ?

If the Sunbelt signs on to play the AAC, the MAC champ could easily get stuck playing also-rans. Id say the bowls would probably be more interested in a Sun Belt champ vs AAC than any SB vs MAC game. The Sunbelt actually has done a pretty decent job of traveling and the most AAC teams are among the best non-AQ travelers.

(06-23-2013 08:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 08:03 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Why do AAC fans insist that the other eastern G5 conferences will happily send their champions to play AAC also rans?

The rumor Ive heard is that the Sunbelt champ is playing an AAC team in New Orleans. If true (and I think that's very possible), what champ is the MAC going to play?

I think it's more likely that the MAC and Sun Belt champs play, either in Mobile or in Little Rock, and the New Orleans bowl has an AAC also-ran vs an SBC also-ran. (I still have the AAC champ ticketed for the Military Bowl vs a low ACC pick.)

Quote:If the Sunbelt signs on to play the AAC, the MAC champ could easily get stuck playing also-rans. May as well be our also rans. The fact is, theres 5 G5 conferences. Two already have P-5 #1 bowl opponents. Theres only 3 champs left. Somebody could easily end up the odd man out.

If the MAC doesn't get the Sun Belt champ, they're in a world of hurt. I just don't see why the Sun Belt would send their champ to play a G5 also-ran instead of the MAC champ.

Maybe I do--because New Orleans is a better bowl, better destination. I suppose you could put the MAC vs SBC game in New Orleans, but the MAC doesn't travel at all, and does anyone want three MAC vs SBC games? (New Orleans, Little Rock, Mobile)