Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
Author Message
perimeterpost Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,977
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 132
I Root For: OHIO
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
this wouldn't help the SBC this year but they should up the requirements to 7-5 or better.
(This post was last modified: 12-14-2013 11:26 AM by perimeterpost.)
12-14-2013 11:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #22
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
(12-14-2013 12:48 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  
(12-13-2013 04:24 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(12-13-2013 04:07 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  I thought the Sun Belt teams didn't want to go to Detroit anyway?
Nobody wants to go to Detroit. Not even the folks who live there.
They're not known for traveling but Detroit isn't that far away. Surely they can bring 1000 fans and outdraw any sunbelt school. The ratings alone really make Pitt the obvious pick.
The best thing about Detroit is the airport. It's easy to get there, and it's easy to leave once you've seen it and figured out you don't want to be there.
12-14-2013 12:07 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Chris02M Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,017
Joined: Jan 2010
Reputation: 15
I Root For: syracuse
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
acc also has tie in to Detroit next year with big ten
12-14-2013 03:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,098
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
(12-14-2013 11:24 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  this wouldn't help the SBC this year but they should up the requirements to 7-5 or better.

It would get the Sunbelt one more bid, since a number of 6-6 P5 schools would be staying home: Miss State, UNC, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, Oregon State, and Washington State. There wouldn't be a P5 school available for the Pizza Eaters Bowl, so they couldn't opt out of the Sunbelt secondary tie-in.

Though the flip side is it would also reduce the number of bowls conferences could sponsor based on their history of generating bowl eligible schools, so it could be trading off one more bowl this year versus having three bowls on an ongoing basis going forward.

(12-14-2013 03:18 PM)Chris02M Wrote:  acc also has tie in to Detroit next year with big ten
Yes, Ford Field switched away from the Pizza Eaters Bowl to a Big Ten / ACC bowl, with the MAC as the secondary tie-in case either cannot send a team ~ with Pitt and Louisville less than six hours drive away, and Syracuse just about six hours if you drive through Ontario.
(This post was last modified: 12-14-2013 08:28 PM by BruceMcF.)
12-14-2013 08:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
westwolf Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 825
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation: 8
I Root For: CFB
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
The SB is the bottom of the barrel, so that was their fate. More bowls next season.
12-14-2013 11:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AndrewMichaelDunn Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 16
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 1
I Root For: TROY
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
(12-14-2013 11:34 PM)westwolf Wrote:  The SB is the bottom of the barrel, so that was their fate. More bowls next season.

wtf

???
12-15-2013 08:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,098
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
(12-14-2013 11:34 PM)westwolf Wrote:  The SB is the bottom of the barrel, so that was their fate.
Winning schools staying home? It was a fate shared with the MAC (Toledo).

In the Sunbelt's case, it seems more a case of bad luck with the way the contracts were drawn up than being "bottom of the barrel", since a year that the Big Ten has a second team in the BCS and a third winning record team bowl ineligible, opening up the Sunbelt's secondary tie-in for the Pizza Eater Bowl, there were enough 6-6 P5 schools in the Northeastern region that there was a regional P5 school available.

All those 6-6 Sunbelt schools staying home? That's more being in the Go5 than a mark of position in the Go5. The Sunbelt's position versus CUSA during BBall season is clear, but during FB season its more up in the air.

Quote: More bowls next season.
Yes. Go5 schools with winning records should find a spot, with one Go5 school guaranteed an Access Bowl spot, and with the MAC having 5 & the Sunbelt 3 primary tie-ins.

Might have some 6-6 Go5 schools going bowling next year, but its still likely to be the de facto rule that P5 schools only need 6-6, but Go5 schools need 7-5 to have confidence of going bowling, even with the additional Go5 vs Go5 bowls.
(This post was last modified: 12-15-2013 03:35 PM by BruceMcF.)
12-15-2013 03:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawkeyeCoug Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 453
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: BYU
Location: Virginia
Post: #28
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
I have no idea why the G5 continue to try to work the bowl system. An NIT-type lower level college football playoff would be much more lucrative, interesting, and allow more fans to see the games. So many lower-level bowls are really "pay to play" just like the SunBelt was doing here.

There is money in post-season college football, even for SunBelt and MAC teams. However, they are never going to get that money if they stick with outsourcing the post season to bowl games. Additionally, with a playoff you pretty much guarantee that every SBC and MAC team that qualifies gets a post-season game. Have no idea why their conferences are dropping the ball on this.

Finally, for us college football fans, and NIT-style second level playoff means more football. That is surely something all of us on this board can support.

(12-13-2013 03:37 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  The Sun Belt even tried bribing bowls to take their teams, yet it didn't work.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...ball-bowls

Quote:The Sun Belt had seven bowl-eligible teams. Only two -- UL Lafayette and Arkansas State -- made the postseason. From a statement by league commissioner Karl Benson:

"During the past several weeks, I have been in discussions and negotiations with all the bowls that might be open. Specifically, the Sun Belt targeted the AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl and Little Caesar's Pizza Bowl and was in negotiations with both up until final decisions were made.



The Sun Belt Conference Presidents and Chancellors authorized me two weeks ago to use Sun Belt funds at my discretion to entice both bowls to take a Sun Belt team. As a result, the Sun Belt made very significant financial offers to both bowls that clearly exceeded anything the Sun Belt has done in previous years."
12-16-2013 12:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CommuterBob Offline
Head Tailgater
*

Posts: 5,840
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 173
I Root For: UCF, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
(12-16-2013 12:26 PM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  I have no idea why the G5 continue to try to work the bowl system. An NIT-type lower level college football playoff would be much more lucrative, interesting, and allow more fans to see the games. So many lower-level bowls are really "pay to play" just like the SunBelt was doing here.

There is money in post-season college football, even for SunBelt and MAC teams. However, they are never going to get that money if they stick with outsourcing the post season to bowl games. Additionally, with a playoff you pretty much guarantee that every SBC and MAC team that qualifies gets a post-season game. Have no idea why their conferences are dropping the ball on this.

Finally, for us college football fans, and NIT-style second level playoff means more football. That is surely something all of us on this board can support.

There already is a 20-team playoff of a lower level of D1 football that nobody watches. What makes you think people are going to magically watch another NIT, when the ones that are in place don't get any ratings? How is that going to be MORE lucrative than going to bowl games?
12-16-2013 03:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,098
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
(12-16-2013 03:46 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  There already is a 20-team playoff of a lower level of D1 football that nobody watches. What makes you think people are going to magically watch another NIT, when the ones that are in place don't get any ratings? How is that going to be MORE lucrative than going to bowl games?
Plus, if it was lucrative (as unlikely as that may be), the media rights would belong to the NCAA, and only a fraction would trickle out to the participating schools ~ like the NCAA BBall tournament, where its around 35% of the revenue that goes to the conferences of the participating schools based on tournament appearances.
12-17-2013 12:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HawkeyeCoug Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 453
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: BYU
Location: Virginia
Post: #31
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
(12-16-2013 03:46 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  There already is a 20-team playoff of a lower level of D1 football that nobody watches. What makes you think people are going to magically watch another NIT, when the ones that are in place don't get any ratings? How is that going to be MORE lucrative than going to bowl games?

From what I've learned, profit can be determined by this simple formula:

Profit = income - cost

For most bowl games the cost portion is so high that pretty much every team loses money, whether they are P5 or G5. Note I said most - big bowls ( which does not include UCF in the Fiesta this year) pull in enough to make it worth it to the teams. College presidents write it off as a "promotional expense" so they can attend the "Rose Bowl Golf Tournament" and "Sugar Bowl Cruise" in the summers. As mentioned in the post I quoted, the Sun Belt this year and San Jose St last year tried to "buy their way in" further increasing the cost.

However, what happens when we drop that "cost" figure to something very small? The income gets converted to profit. With playoffs at home locations, it changes the picture.

Let's take a typical low-level G5 team. Say they can expect only 25K attendance, with an average revenue/fan of $20. That is $500K. Assume that the cost to operate the stadium for one game is $100K, and travel expenses for the visiting team is $100K. Then, assume that the TV money will be similar to a lower-level bowl. Due to cross-promotion of games it is more valuable, but since I'm lowballing assume only $500k in TV money. Split the ticket revenue 2:1 for the home team, and split the TV money 1:1. Home team *profits* $450K, and visiting team *profits* $350K.

That may not sound like much, but let's assume an average team loses only $100K going to a bowl game. That is a difference of half a million dollars. Also, multiply the profit by 2-3 games and that is more money than SB teams get from playing one-and-done games with the SEC. While Texas could find that much money in Mack Brown's couch, it would be a significant fractional boost to SBC and MAC teams.

I certainly invite you to run your own numbers, and tell me your estimates at profit and loss. There are plenty of smart and knowledgeable people on the board that would have more accurate numbers than the SWAG's I threw up. But I think they will support the same premise: a low level playoff (even a bottom-feeder playoff) would be much more lucrative to the SunBelt and MAC than low-level bowls currently are.
12-17-2013 11:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CommuterBob Offline
Head Tailgater
*

Posts: 5,840
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 173
I Root For: UCF, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Who was bowl eligible that didn't get a bowl?
(12-17-2013 11:25 AM)HawkeyeCoug Wrote:  
(12-16-2013 03:46 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  There already is a 20-team playoff of a lower level of D1 football that nobody watches. What makes you think people are going to magically watch another NIT, when the ones that are in place don't get any ratings? How is that going to be MORE lucrative than going to bowl games?

From what I've learned, profit can be determined by this simple formula:

Profit = income - cost

For most bowl games the cost portion is so high that pretty much every team loses money, whether they are P5 or G5. Note I said most - big bowls ( which does not include UCF in the Fiesta this year) pull in enough to make it worth it to the teams. College presidents write it off as a "promotional expense" so they can attend the "Rose Bowl Golf Tournament" and "Sugar Bowl Cruise" in the summers. As mentioned in the post I quoted, the Sun Belt this year and San Jose St last year tried to "buy their way in" further increasing the cost.

However, what happens when we drop that "cost" figure to something very small? The income gets converted to profit. With playoffs at home locations, it changes the picture.

Let's take a typical low-level G5 team. Say they can expect only 25K attendance, with an average revenue/fan of $20. That is $500K. Assume that the cost to operate the stadium for one game is $100K, and travel expenses for the visiting team is $100K. Then, assume that the TV money will be similar to a lower-level bowl. Due to cross-promotion of games it is more valuable, but since I'm lowballing assume only $500k in TV money. Split the ticket revenue 2:1 for the home team, and split the TV money 1:1. Home team *profits* $450K, and visiting team *profits* $350K.

That may not sound like much, but let's assume an average team loses only $100K going to a bowl game. That is a difference of half a million dollars. Also, multiply the profit by 2-3 games and that is more money than SB teams get from playing one-and-done games with the SEC. While Texas could find that much money in Mack Brown's couch, it would be a significant fractional boost to SBC and MAC teams.

I certainly invite you to run your own numbers, and tell me your estimates at profit and loss. There are plenty of smart and knowledgeable people on the board that would have more accurate numbers than the SWAG's I threw up. But I think they will support the same premise: a low level playoff (even a bottom-feeder playoff) would be much more lucrative to the SunBelt and MAC than low-level bowls currently are.

Your assumptions are way off. Travel expenses for a team are more in the $400K range, TV money won't be anywhere close to low-level bowls except for maybe the CG (certainly not for rounds 1-2), and operating expenses of a stadium are also higher than you estimate.

So a visiting team even in your scenario (with way too much TV money) barely breaks even, if at all, as does the home team - which is about what they do in the lower-level bowls after all is said and done. And remember that virtually nobody watches lower levels of playoffs in any sport. The NIT gets no ratings and has little fan interest even from the teams playing in it, minor league baseball gets no ratings, the D-league gets no ratings. It's not only no more lucrative, it would draw less interest.
12-17-2013 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.