They have the
1. Orange
2. Russell Athletic
3-6 Pinstripe
3-6 Belk
3-6 Sun
3-6 Music City/Gator
7-10 Military
7-10 ????
7-10 ????
7-10 ????

The Detroit Bowl has been rumored, and the ST Pete Bowl has been rumored as a part-time tie in.

I'm going to try to list what's still basically "on the draft board" for the ACC to pick from. (Whether I'm wrong or right about the Liberty Bowl and The American, it's not going to the ACC.)

Independence Bowl, 2 slots open
Birmingham Bowl looks like SEC vs AAC, but the SEC will need a backup
Detroit Bowl, 1 slot open for the ACC, probably needs a backup
Hawaii Bowl, 1 slot open vs MWC (Hawaii)
Armed Forces Bowl--both slots open at this point, but not for the ACC.
St Petersburg Bowl. 1 slot open vs AAC
New Orleans Bowl. 1 slot open vs Sun Belt
Poinsettia Bowl. 1 slot open vs MWC
New Mexico Bowl. 1 slot open, twitter(?) said CUSA
Idaho Potato Bowl, 1 slot open vs MWC
Mobile GoDaddy Bowl. 2 slots open, probably SBC vs MAC

So is the move to make
Detroit Bowl vs Big 10 or backup
Birmingham Bowl vs SEC, with the AAC backing up both the SEC and ACC
Independence Bowl vs a pool of lower-FBS conferences?

That gives the ACC two games against lower-FBS guaranteed, with as many as 5, but do they have any other choice?

Is St Pete bowl really a rumor? It was reported by Greg Auman of the Tampa Bay Times on his twitter account.

Also, AAC Commish and Brett McMurphy also said AAC would be in Birmingham.

So, out of the above options, I will say Independence, Detroit, and St. Pete.

2014 Bowl Line Up so far

1. Orange vs B10,SEC or ND
Top Tier Selections
2. Champs vs B12
2A. Capital One vs SEC every three years
Mid Tier bowls
3. Pinstripe vs B10
4. Gator/Music vs SEC
5. Belk vs SEC
6. Sun vs PAC 12
Bottom Tier
7. ?? (My Prediction is Liberty with no lower than 7 or 8th team)
8. Military vs AAC
9. ?? (My Prediction hybrid St. Pete/Independence with CUSA like Gator/Music B10 deal.)
10. Detroit vs B10

The question's left will be,
1. does the ACC get the Liberty? If so do they guarantee the 7th selection to play the B12 7th selection? Or move Liberty to Mid-Tier with the others?
2. Does the ACC hold at 9 bowls and have 10 every 3years or get 10th bowl and have 11 slots every 3. I see if the St. Pete or Independence are willing to do this. If the rumor of St. Pete with the ACC/CUSA are true, then I could see them offer the same split with the Independence with ACC/CUSA doing something like they have down with B10 with Gator/Music for 6 years. I can see the Detroit becoming the Boise Bowl of the ACC. Sending the 10th team or not having a team available.

Armed forces has Navy and Army signed up for 4 of the next 5 years already. Look for BYU to take a slot there as well.

I think the poinsetta becomes a MWC vs AAC game with BYU occasionally taking a slot

Potato bowl probably stays a MWC vs MAC game. (maybe a sunblet game)
New Mexico will be MWC vs CUSA I am hearing
Hawaii will be MWC vs CUSA as well unless the AAC wants a slot

(07-04-2013 02:42 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  2014 Bowl Line Up so far

1. Orange vs B10,SEC or ND
Top Tier Selections
2. Champs vs B12
2A. Capital One vs SEC every three years
Mid Tier bowls
3. Pinstripe vs B10
4. Gator/Music vs SEC
5. Belk vs SEC
6. Sun vs PAC 12
Bottom Tier
7. ?? (My Prediction is Liberty with no lower than 7 or 8th team)
8. Military vs AAC
9. ?? (My Prediction hybrid St. Pete/Independence with CUSA like Gator/Music B10 deal.)
10. Detroit vs B10

The question's left will be,
1. does the ACC get the Liberty? If so do they guarantee the 7th selection to play the B12 7th selection? Or move Liberty to Mid-Tier with the others?
2. Does the ACC hold at 9 bowls and have 10 every 3years or get 10th bowl and have 11 slots every 3. I see if the St. Pete or Independence are willing to do this. If the rumor of St. Pete with the ACC/CUSA are true, then I could see them offer the same split with the Independence with ACC/CUSA doing something like they have down with B10 with Gator/Music for 6 years. I can see the Detroit becoming the Boise Bowl of the ACC. Sending the 10th team or not having a team available.

I could see that Liberty scenario happening, which would be a tremendous blow to the AAC--one I don't see any real way for them to make up for. Where would the AAC #1 go in that scenario? The only opponent options left are

1) MAC or Sunbelt champ

2) P-5 #7 (at best, probably lower)

3) CUSA #2/3 or MW #2/3.

Losing the Liberty creates a worst case scenario for the AAC champions bowl destination. In this case, it might be best to let the champ just float. There's a reasonably decent chance that something nice might open up in the "at large" pool most years. If not, you send them to the best bowl available to the AAC from the AAC tie-ins and the "at large" pool. That would kinda suck, but I see no better option if the Liberty decides to move away from the AAC.

(07-04-2013 02:51 PM)billings Wrote:  Armed forces has Navy and Army signed up for 4 of the next 5 years already. Look for BYU to take a slot there as well.
I think the poinsetta becomes a MWC vs AAC game with BYU occasionally taking a slot

Potato bowl probably stays a MWC vs MAC game. (maybe a sunblet game)
New Mexico will be MWC vs CUSA I am hearing
Hawaii will be MWC vs CUSA as well unless the AAC wants a slot

Two of those pre-signed years are to AAC future member Navy. What I could see happening is that those two years simply become AAC slots. Doing that allows the AAC to anchor the bowl and leaves just 2 of the next 6 years of opponent slots spoken for.

At that point, you could have Army with 2 years, BYU with one year, and either the Big-12 or Big-10 would take the other 3 years when they are not tied to the HOD bowl. The MW would back up the entire package (probably getting to the bowl the 2 years Army is signed for, maybe more if the B1G or B12 doesn't have enough teams). This makes a ton of sense for everyone (BYU, AFB, AAC, Big-12--even the MW wins to a degree by keeping a backup tie to an out-of-footprint Texas bowl).

The only thing that makes me say this may not go down this way is the MW lack of interest in the LA Bowl. As Billings has mentioned, if losing the AFB was possible, I would think the MW would be way more interested in the Christmas Bowl.

(07-04-2013 02:51 PM)billings Wrote:  Armed forces has Navy and Army signed up for 4 of the next 5 years already. Look for BYU to take a slot there as well.

I think the poinsetta becomes a MWC vs AAC game with BYU occasionally taking a slot

Potato bowl probably stays a MWC vs MAC game. (maybe a sunblet game)
New Mexico will be MWC vs CUSA I am hearing
Hawaii will be MWC vs CUSA as well unless the AAC wants a slot

The MAC according to the commissioner has Boise locked up for the next cycle.

Quote:"That (Detroit) is still a work in progress,'' he said. "All of (the bowl games) are. We know we have Mobile and Boise locked up. Detroit appears to be looking at Big Ten-ACC, but that has not been finalized yet. I am bullish on Detroit. I like the people there, and their management style. We will stay in contact there.

"My sense, in the end, we will wind up with four or five primary (bowl) agreements, then one or two secondary agreements. The key for us is to be strategic.''

http://www.cleveland.com/sports/college/...er_default

(07-04-2013 03:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2013 02:51 PM)billings Wrote:  Armed forces has Navy and Army signed up for 4 of the next 5 years already. Look for BYU to take a slot there as well.
I think the poinsetta becomes a MWC vs AAC game with BYU occasionally taking a slot

Potato bowl probably stays a MWC vs MAC game. (maybe a sunblet game)
New Mexico will be MWC vs CUSA I am hearing
Hawaii will be MWC vs CUSA as well unless the AAC wants a slot

Two of those pre-signed years are to AAC future member Navy. What I could see happening is that those two years simply become AAC slots. Doing that allows the AAC to anchor the bowl and leaves just 2 of the next 6 years of opponent slots spoken for.

At that point, you could have Army with 2 years, BYU with one year, and either the Big-12 or Big-10 would take the other 3 years when they are not tied to the HOD bowl. The MW would back up the entire package (probably getting to the bowl the 2 years Army is signed for, maybe more if the B1G or B12 doesn't have enough teams). This makes a ton of sense for everyone (BYU, AFB, AAC, Big-12--even the MW wins to a degree by keeping a backup tie to an out-of-footprint Texas bowl).

The only thing that makes me say this may not go down this way is the MW lack of interest in the LA Bowl. As Billings has mentioned, if losing the AFB was possible, I would think the MW would be way more interested in the Christmas Bowl.

I still have to think that the MWC with Air Force and AAC with Navy are the anchors for the Armed Forces Bowl. Army, BYU and the Big Ten could rotate in, but the AFB seems to want to have an academy every year if they can do it, and with the MWC and AAC they can. And with Army in the mix, they don't have the problem (if it's a problem) of the same school going 3 out of 4 years.

If the Big Ten doesn't want the AFB, something like:

2014 Army vs AAC
2015 MWC(AFA) vs AAC
2016 AAC(Navy) vs MWC
2017 Army vs MWC
2018 MWC(AFA) vs AAC
2019 AAC(Navy) vs MWC
5 MWC, 5 AAC, 2 Army.

If the Big Ten does want the bowl every other year, something like:

2014 Army vs AAC
2015 MWC(AFA) vs B1G
2016 AAC(Navy) vs MWC
2017 Army vs B1G
2018 MWC(AFA) vs AAC
2019 B1G vs AAC (Navy)
That's 3 B1g (vs Army, Navy, AFA), 4 AAC(2 Navy), 3 MWC(2 AFA). Could also be 4 MWC/3 AAC.

(07-04-2013 01:41 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  They have the
1. Orange
2. Russell Athletic
3-6 Pinstripe
3-6 Belk
3-6 Sun
3-6 Music City/Gator
7-10 Military
7-10 ????
7-10 ????
7-10 ????

The Detroit Bowl has been rumored, and the ST Pete Bowl has been rumored as a part-time tie in.

One big thing that we are assuming here that I don't think is necessarily the case.......the ACC will be going after 10 bowl games.

Posts last month when the ACC had signed 6 bowls indicated that they were looking at 3 out of 4 (Military, Detroit, Independence, Liberty). That would make for 9 bowls. What they might mean then for 10 is in reference to Notre Dame taking one of their selections.

7. Military
8. Detroit
9. Independence/St. Pete (rotating with CUSA)

I'm not sure what is going to happen with the Liberty. If its a high B12 pick it will probably get the SEC #8 or something like that.

(07-04-2013 04:36 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  One big thing that we are assuming here that I don't think is necessarily the case.......the ACC will be going after 10 bowl games.

With 15 schools, they could need 10 bowls some years. From 2007-2012, the ACC-2015 had 8, 11, 8, 12, 11 and 9 bowl-eligibles.

And, more concretely, the ESPN article on the Military Bowl said it was getting ACC #7-10. Which implies that there's a #8, a #9, and a #10.

Remember as I stated in an early post, the ACC will have either 9 slots with 10 every 3 years or 10 slots with 11 every 3 years due to the Capital One Bowl. With the 15 teams, 10 bowls would not be out of the realm. All required with a bowl tie-in will be 4-0 or 3-1 OOC with 2-6 or 3-5 conference record for 6-6 record. The only requirement is conference teams with winning records have to be placed first.

(07-04-2013 04:20 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-04-2013 03:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2013 02:51 PM)billings Wrote:  Armed forces has Navy and Army signed up for 4 of the next 5 years already. Look for BYU to take a slot there as well.
I think the poinsetta becomes a MWC vs AAC game with BYU occasionally taking a slot

Potato bowl probably stays a MWC vs MAC game. (maybe a sunblet game)
New Mexico will be MWC vs CUSA I am hearing
Hawaii will be MWC vs CUSA as well unless the AAC wants a slot

Two of those pre-signed years are to AAC future member Navy. What I could see happening is that those two years simply become AAC slots. Doing that allows the AAC to anchor the bowl and leaves just 2 of the next 6 years of opponent slots spoken for.

At that point, you could have Army with 2 years, BYU with one year, and either the Big-12 or Big-10 would take the other 3 years when they are not tied to the HOD bowl. The MW would back up the entire package (probably getting to the bowl the 2 years Army is signed for, maybe more if the B1G or B12 doesn't have enough teams). This makes a ton of sense for everyone (BYU, AFB, AAC, Big-12--even the MW wins to a degree by keeping a backup tie to an out-of-footprint Texas bowl).

The only thing that makes me say this may not go down this way is the MW lack of interest in the LA Bowl. As Billings has mentioned, if losing the AFB was possible, I would think the MW would be way more interested in the Christmas Bowl.

I still have to think that the MWC with Air Force and AAC with Navy are the anchors for the Armed Forces Bowl. Army, BYU and the Big Ten could rotate in, but the AFB seems to want to have an academy every year if they can do it, and with the MWC and AAC they can. And with Army in the mix, they don't have the problem (if it's a problem) of the same school going 3 out of 4 years.

If the Big Ten doesn't want the AFB, something like:

2014 Army vs AAC
2015 MWC(AFA) vs AAC
2016 AAC(Navy) vs MWC
2017 Army vs MWC
2018 MWC(AFA) vs AAC
2019 AAC(Navy) vs MWC
5 MWC, 5 AAC, 2 Army.

If the Big Ten does want the bowl every other year, something like:

2014 Army vs AAC
2015 MWC(AFA) vs B1G
2016 AAC(Navy) vs MWC
2017 Army vs B1G
2018 MWC(AFA) vs AAC
2019 B1G vs AAC (Navy)
That's 3 B1g (vs Army, Navy, AFA), 4 AAC(2 Navy), 3 MWC(2 AFA). Could also be 4 MWC/3 AAC.

I think theres some new issues that the AFB is probably going to have to deal with. TCU is not longer in the Mountain West. None of the service academies are in the Ft Worth area. Navy now has a bowl game in it's home stadium--isn't that their likely destination when bowl qualified? Only one academy is not covered by conference bowl tie agreements.

TCU is no longer in the MW, thus there is little area connection with the MW. And while its not really the AFB's problem, the AAC needs a western bowl and the AFB location makes a lot of sense for the estern AAC teams. If you look at it from the bowls prospective, having Tulsa, Houston, and SMU play in that bowl makes a lot of sense. Having Navy play San Diego in Ft Worth---well, that makes a lot less sense and probably sells a lot less tickets.

Its actually going to be interesting to see how the AFB adapts to the new environment. The best combo is the AAC vs Big-12. The next best is probably AAC vs CUSA (for selling tickets)---though AAC vs MW might be better for TV. The whole Armed Forces thing might not really work very well anymore now that 2 or the 3 service academies are in conferences and are no longer independents.

(07-04-2013 05:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think theres some new issues that the AFB is probably going to have to deal with. TCU is not longer in the Mountain West.

I raised that point once, and someone on the forum assured me that Ft Worth was supportive of the bowl.

Quote: None of the service academies are in the Ft Worth area. Navy now has a bowl game in it's home stadium--isn't that their likely destination when bowl qualified?

I'd say yes, but not every year. I think Navy would want to have bowl trips at least sometimes. And I think the rest of the AAC is going to want some access to the Military Bowl, too.

I think Navy would be very happy with a three-year rotation, Military-Armed Forces-SomewhereElse.

Quote:Only one academy is not covered by conference bowl tie agreements.

And they have problems being bowl-eligible anyway.

Quote:TCU is no longer in the MW, thus there is little area connection with the MW.

Apparently the bowl is kind of a "Fort Worth" thing, so they can sell some tickets just to poke a stick in Dallas' eye.

Quote:And while its not really the AFB's problem, the AAC needs a western bowl and the AFB location makes a lot of sense for the western AAC teams. If you look at it from the bowls prospective, having Tulsa, Houston, and SMU play in that bowl makes a lot of sense. Having Navy play San Diego in Ft Worth---well, that makes a lot less sense and probably sells a lot less tickets.

As far as I can tell, Fort Worth supports the game pretty well. Navy would sell some tickets. So the MWC not selling tickets doesn't hurt as much. Navy vs SJSU isn't ideal, but it probably sells as many tickets as Houston vs North Texas or UTSA vs Tulane.

Quote:Its actually going to be interesting to see how the AFB adapts to the new environment. The best combo is the AAC vs Big-12. The next best is probably AAC vs CUSA (for selling tickets)---though AAC vs MW might be better for TV. The whole Armed Forces thing might not really work very well anymore now that 2 or the 3 service academies are in conferences and are no longer independents.

One reason the Armed Forces Bowl thing works is selling tickets--you can sell a service academy game as a rah-rah special occasion--you'll sell more tickets in Dallas-Fort Worth for Navy vs LT or Army vs Memphis than for Louisiana Tech vs Memphis.

But the bigger reason is the sponsors. Bell Helicopter is paying six, seven figures so that they can rub shoulders with admirals and generals and talk helicopters. #17 Houston vs #22 Southern Miss doesn't help them sell helicopters.

Having the academies in conferences doesn't really change that dynamic. It just means that if the academy isn't bowl-eligible, you have a backup lined up automatically. Unless you can get a P5 tie in, AAC vs MWC is the best bet, so you can rotate Navy and Air Force as anchor teams. (I think they'll try to work Army into the rotation as well, probably with more flexibility since Army isn't bowl eligible THAT often.)

(07-04-2013 06:03 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-04-2013 05:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I think theres some new issues that the AFB is probably going to have to deal with. TCU is not longer in the Mountain West.

I raised that point once, and someone on the forum assured me that Ft Worth was supportive of the bowl.

Quote: None of the service academies are in the Ft Worth area. Navy now has a bowl game in it's home stadium--isn't that their likely destination when bowl qualified?

I'd say yes, but not every year. I think Navy would want to have bowl trips at least sometimes. And I think the rest of the AAC is going to want some access to the Military Bowl, too.

I think Navy would be very happy with a three-year rotation, Military-Armed Forces-SomewhereElse.

Quote:Only one academy is not covered by conference bowl tie agreements.

And they have problems being bowl-eligible anyway.

Quote:TCU is no longer in the MW, thus there is little area connection with the MW.

Apparently the bowl is kind of a "Fort Worth" thing, so they can sell some tickets just to poke a stick in Dallas' eye.

Quote:And while its not really the AFB's problem, the AAC needs a western bowl and the AFB location makes a lot of sense for the western AAC teams. If you look at it from the bowls prospective, having Tulsa, Houston, and SMU play in that bowl makes a lot of sense. Having Navy play San Diego in Ft Worth---well, that makes a lot less sense and probably sells a lot less tickets.

As far as I can tell, Fort Worth supports the game pretty well. Navy would sell some tickets. So the MWC not selling tickets doesn't hurt as much. Navy vs SJSU isn't ideal, but it probably sells as many tickets as Houston vs North Texas or UTSA vs Tulane.

Quote:Its actually going to be interesting to see how the AFB adapts to the new environment. The best combo is the AAC vs Big-12. The next best is probably AAC vs CUSA (for selling tickets)---though AAC vs MW might be better for TV. The whole Armed Forces thing might not really work very well anymore now that 2 or the 3 service academies are in conferences and are no longer independents.

One reason the Armed Forces Bowl thing works is selling tickets--you can sell a service academy game as a rah-rah special occasion--you'll sell more tickets in Dallas-Fort Worth for Navy vs LT or Army vs Memphis than for Louisiana Tech vs Memphis.

But the bigger reason is the sponsors. Bell Helicopter is paying six, seven figures so that they can rub shoulders with admirals and generals and talk helicopters. #17 Houston vs #22 Southern Miss doesn't help them sell helicopters.

Having the academies in conferences doesn't really change that dynamic. It just means that if the academy isn't bowl-eligible, you have a backup lined up automatically. Unless you can get a P5 tie in, AAC vs MWC is the best bet, so you can rotate Navy and Air Force as anchor teams. (I think they'll try to work Army into the rotation as well, probably with more flexibility since Army isn't bowl eligible THAT often.)

I disagree with most of your logic on this. I think its highly unlikely that Navy would outsell say Houston vs UTSA (actually this matchup would sell a ton of tickets). Its virtually impossible that a armed forces based bowl outsells Houston vs Baylor or Tech. The bowl probably breaks attendance records with those type matchups. Like I said, the best course for this bowl is a AAC vs low Big-12. They may be able to do something like that and I believe that would trump anything else they could possibly do.

What I do agree with is the part in bold. I think you make a very good point there. It kind leads back to the question I asked at the end of my last post---Is it maybe its time for the bowl to move away from that armed forces angle. Given all the changes that I had pointed out, that angle may not work quite as well in the new environment. They might be better off finding a different sponsor and working with the available conferences in the region. If this game could land an AAC anchor, a low Big-12 selection with a CUSA backup---its likely going to become one of the more successful lower end bowls. I would think an energy company might be a nice sponsor for the bowl. I guess I'm just saying if I were running this bowl, given the new college landscape, I'd at least be giving a change of direction a really hard look. My personal opinion is that the bowl probably needs to change in order to grow.

(07-04-2013 07:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I disagree with most of your logic on this. I think its highly unlikely that Navy would outsell say Houston vs UTSA (actually this matchup would sell a ton of tickets).

I specifically didn't match Houston vs UTSA, just because that's the best AAC vs CUSA matchup for attendance in Texas. I try to use middle-of-the-road examples like Memphis-UTSA or Houston-LT instead of Rice-Tulsa or Houston-UTSA.

Quote:ts virtually impossible that a armed forces based bowl outsells Houston vs Baylor or Tech. The bowl probably breaks attendance records with those type matchups. Like I said, the best course for this bowl is a AAC vs low Big-12. They may be able to do something like that and I believe that would trump anything else they could possibly do.

Obviously, if you can get a Big 12 tie-in for a Texas bowl, you do it. You do it every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Or a Big 10 or SEC tie-in. But I don't think it's realistic--the Armed Forces Bowl is picking after the CFP, Alamo, Russell Athletic, Arizona, Houston, Liberty and maybe Heart of Dallas, so #8 or 9. If it's the other half of the Heart of Dallas tie-in, then it's going to be an at-large half the time.

I really think that the Big Ten and Big 12 will be each other's backups in the Heart of Dallas bowl. Let's say it's the Big Ten's year in the HoD in the old Cotton Bowl, and the Big Ten is short teams. So you'd have 6-6 Kansas or Minnesota playing SMU in Fort Worth while Toledo or Troy plays in the old Cotton Bowl?

Quote:What I do agree with is the part in bold. I think you make a very good point there. It kind leads back to the question I asked at the end of my last post---Is it maybe its time for the bowl to move away from that armed forces angle. Given all the changes that I had pointed out, that angle may not work quite as well in the new environment. They might be better off finding a different sponsor and working with the available conferences in the region. If this game could land an AAC anchor, a low Big-12 selection with a CUSA backup---its likely going to become one of the more successful lower end bowls. I would think an energy company might be a nice sponsor for the bowl. I guess I'm just saying if I were running this bowl, given the new college landscape, I'd at least be giving a change of direction a really hard look. My personal opinion is that the bowl probably needs to change in order to grow.

I think AAC vs MWC, with Army in the mix, IS the change. Obviously, if you could get Big 12 #7 vs AAC in the Dr Pepper Bowl, that would be better. But since I don't think you can, alternating Navy vs MWC and Air Force vs AAC in the Armed Forces Bowl is better than AAC vs CUSA in the Whataburger Bowl.

(07-04-2013 09:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-04-2013 07:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I disagree with most of your logic on this. I think its highly unlikely that Navy would outsell say Houston vs UTSA (actually this matchup would sell a ton of tickets).

I specifically didn't match Houston vs UTSA, just because that's the best AAC vs CUSA matchup for attendance in Texas. I try to use middle-of-the-road examples like Memphis-UTSA or Houston-LT instead of Rice-Tulsa or Houston-UTSA.

Quote:ts virtually impossible that a armed forces based bowl outsells Houston vs Baylor or Tech. The bowl probably breaks attendance records with those type matchups. Like I said, the best course for this bowl is a AAC vs low Big-12. They may be able to do something like that and I believe that would trump anything else they could possibly do.

Obviously, if you can get a Big 12 tie-in for a Texas bowl, you do it. You do it every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Or a Big 10 or SEC tie-in. But I don't think it's realistic--the Armed Forces Bowl is picking after the CFP, Alamo, Russell Athletic, Arizona, Houston, Liberty and maybe Heart of Dallas, so #8 or 9. If it's the other half of the Heart of Dallas tie-in, then it's going to be an at-large half the time.

I really think that the Big Ten and Big 12 will be each other's backups in the Heart of Dallas bowl. Let's say it's the Big Ten's year in the HoD in the old Cotton Bowl, and the Big Ten is short teams. So you'd have 6-6 Kansas or Minnesota playing SMU in Fort Worth while Toledo or Troy plays in the old Cotton Bowl?

Quote:What I do agree with is the part in bold. I think you make a very good point there. It kind leads back to the question I asked at the end of my last post---Is it maybe its time for the bowl to move away from that armed forces angle. Given all the changes that I had pointed out, that angle may not work quite as well in the new environment. They might be better off finding a different sponsor and working with the available conferences in the region. If this game could land an AAC anchor, a low Big-12 selection with a CUSA backup---its likely going to become one of the more successful lower end bowls. I would think an energy company might be a nice sponsor for the bowl. I guess I'm just saying if I were running this bowl, given the new college landscape, I'd at least be giving a change of direction a really hard look. My personal opinion is that the bowl probably needs to change in order to grow.

I think AAC vs MWC, with Army in the mix, IS the change. Obviously, if you could get Big 12 #7 vs AAC in the Dr Pepper Bowl, that would be better. But since I don't think you can, alternating Navy vs MWC and Air Force vs AAC in the Armed Forces Bowl is better than AAC vs CUSA in the Whataburger Bowl.

Yep. Perhaps a BYU once in awhile in there as well

(07-04-2013 10:19 PM)billings Wrote:  

(07-04-2013 09:14 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(07-04-2013 07:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I disagree with most of your logic on this. I think its highly unlikely that Navy would outsell say Houston vs UTSA (actually this matchup would sell a ton of tickets).

I specifically didn't match Houston vs UTSA, just because that's the best AAC vs CUSA matchup for attendance in Texas. I try to use middle-of-the-road examples like Memphis-UTSA or Houston-LT instead of Rice-Tulsa or Houston-UTSA.

Quote:ts virtually impossible that a armed forces based bowl outsells Houston vs Baylor or Tech. The bowl probably breaks attendance records with those type matchups. Like I said, the best course for this bowl is a AAC vs low Big-12. They may be able to do something like that and I believe that would trump anything else they could possibly do.

Obviously, if you can get a Big 12 tie-in for a Texas bowl, you do it. You do it every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Or a Big 10 or SEC tie-in. But I don't think it's realistic--the Armed Forces Bowl is picking after the CFP, Alamo, Russell Athletic, Arizona, Houston, Liberty and maybe Heart of Dallas, so #8 or 9. If it's the other half of the Heart of Dallas tie-in, then it's going to be an at-large half the time.

I really think that the Big Ten and Big 12 will be each other's backups in the Heart of Dallas bowl. Let's say it's the Big Ten's year in the HoD in the old Cotton Bowl, and the Big Ten is short teams. So you'd have 6-6 Kansas or Minnesota playing SMU in Fort Worth while Toledo or Troy plays in the old Cotton Bowl?

Quote:What I do agree with is the part in bold. I think you make a very good point there. It kind leads back to the question I asked at the end of my last post---Is it maybe its time for the bowl to move away from that armed forces angle. Given all the changes that I had pointed out, that angle may not work quite as well in the new environment. They might be better off finding a different sponsor and working with the available conferences in the region. If this game could land an AAC anchor, a low Big-12 selection with a CUSA backup---its likely going to become one of the more successful lower end bowls. I would think an energy company might be a nice sponsor for the bowl. I guess I'm just saying if I were running this bowl, given the new college landscape, I'd at least be giving a change of direction a really hard look. My personal opinion is that the bowl probably needs to change in order to grow.

I think AAC vs MWC, with Army in the mix, IS the change. Obviously, if you could get Big 12 #7 vs AAC in the Dr Pepper Bowl, that would be better. But since I don't think you can, alternating Navy vs MWC and Air Force vs AAC in the Armed Forces Bowl is better than AAC vs CUSA in the Whataburger Bowl.

Yep. Perhaps a BYU once in awhile in there as well

That's all well and good--but who is buying these tickets? Fort Worth is a million miles from a Navy base and nowhere near a MW school. Its not a bad TV matchup, but there's the potential for problems moving tickets with the lineup your proposing. I guess we will see, but don't be surprised if you see something that strikes a stronger regional chord with a partial tie to a P-5. With TCU in the B-12, don't be surprised if there is some B-12 connection.

i think the acc is screwed that is why they did not give there bowl tie in on the 8th they only have 7 bowl tie in and wanted 9 or 10.
i think the outher big 4 are pushing them around.
some even said sun would not re up with ACC. which would leave them with just 6 tie in.
if they dont end up with 9 you know they got screwed but not as bad as AAC
if they end up with 2 bowl agenest AAC they will show that they have been screwed and pushed around.

(07-11-2013 06:46 PM)frank man Wrote:  i think the acc is screwed that is why they did not give there bowl tie in on the 8th they only have 7 bowl tie in and wanted 9 or 10.
i think the outher big 4 are pushing them around.
some even said sun would not re up with ACC. which would leave them with just 6 tie in.
if they dont end up with 9 you know they got screwed but not as bad as AAC
if they end up with 2 bowl agenest AAC they will show that they have been screwed and pushed around.

I think the ACC will be doing well to only have 2 AAC tie ins and no other Go5 tie ins. The only other bowl that I see available that could have and other P5 tie in is the independence bowl. The ACC has a history with them but what other p5 conference wants to go to Shrevport.

The biggest concern I have is if ACC teams 7-10 have to pair up with AAC 1-3. I don't like the ACC's chances with those pairings. Probably the 10 best Go5 schools besides Boise are in the AAC, so those top teams could be pretty good.

1-Playoff/Orange/Access
1a-Capital one(when bigten is in orange bowl) Vs SEC
2-Russell Athletic Bowl Vs Big 12

POOL A:
3-Gator/Music City Bowl VS SEC
4-Belk Bowl VS SEC
5-Pinstripe Bowl VS B1G
6-Sun Bowl VS Pac 12

POOL B:
7-Independence Bowl VS SEC
8-Military Bowl VS AAC
9-Detroit Bowl VS B1G
10-St Pete Bowl(3 times in 6 years ) VS AAC